Unconference Report

unable unclear unconscious unnecessary Insights from the 2021 Australian Social Enterprise Virtual Unconference

This report was compiled

by Matthew Allen, with input from Dr Joanne McNeill and Alex Hannant from The Yunus Centre, Griffith University

Insights from the 2021 Australian Social Enterprise Virtual Unconference

The Australian Social Enterprise Virtual Unconference, held in July 2021, was attended by almost 600 people from across the country. The event included 24 participantled sessions and a plenary session that encouraged all participants to co-design the vision and agenda for the upcoming Social Enterprise World Forum (SEWF), to be held in Meanjin / Brisbane in September, 2022.

Drawing from online whiteboard notes, comments submitted by participants, facilitator notes and post-event feedback, this report provides: • a commentated summary of the current state and future aspirations for Australia’s social enterprise sector, and • presents some initial recommendations for actions leading up to the 2022 SEWF. Discussions at the forum were considered, informed and nuanced, and reveal a growing cohort of social enterprise stakeholders who are enthusiastic about being part of a national and global movement working towards social and economic change. It is also clear that significant effort will be required to translate all the things the sector seeks – such as collaboration, First Nations solidarity, systems change, impact, scale - into more practice.

It’s important to note that the Unconference wasn’t intended nor designed to generate any objective claims or conclusions about ‘the sector’ as a whole. In relation to this summary report, it is probably most helpful to view the event, and its participants, as a sample of opinions and positions across a broad – but not necessarily representative – range of social enterprise practitioners, intermediaries, networks and stakeholders.

We’d like to extend a warm thanks to The Yunus Centre for compiling this report, who are working on the National Social Enterprise Strategy and are at the helm of all things socent research, and Billy Blue Creative, for their design nous.

Where are we now?

One of the areas Unconference organisers hoped to gain feedback on was how participants viewed the current state of social enterprise in Australia; what they were proud of and wanted to share, what challenges they faced, and how they felt about the sector’s future. Overall, and despite the impacts of COVID-19, participants were buoyant about the state of social enterprise in Australia. Major points of pride included the sector’s collaborative approach, achievements in social procurement, diversity, and First Nations leadership.

A number of participants also expressed great pride in what Australian social enterprises have been able to achieve despite limited government support.

The sector’s identity

Towards a systems approach

A striking feature of the Unconference was the evidence of a gradual shift away from ‘grand narratives’ of individual, heroic entrepreneurs and their achievements, and towards stakeholder inclusion, place-based approaches, and collaborative practices leading to larger-scale social change.

Many of the Unconference participants demonstrated an interest in systems and complexity-based approaches to addressing social and environmental issues, and see this as an area of great potential for the sector to further explore and develop. Specialised resources and capability building in this field, including any that may be provided through SEWF2022 activities, will help grow shared understanding of key concepts, terms, and processes.

Work in progress The overall sense of pride in Australia’s social enterprise sector was accompanied by a recognition that much work remains to be done. Participants noted the struggle for smaller enterprises to access social procurement opportunities, the ongoing power dynamics and fragmentation of the sector, and the need for engagement with First Nations entrepreneurship to be genuinely meaningful, humble and non-appropriative.

Persistent tensions Participant responses also covered some familiar tensions and challenges, including arguments for and against a single standard definition for social enterprise, debates around the balance between ‘scaled up’ and ‘locally appropriate’, and concerns regarding whether impact measurement should (or could) be more standardised and harmonised across the sector.

Unsurprisingly, these same tensions among others - were highlighted in the SENS Directions Report (Part One), which proposes that the sector focuses on moving forwards with those areas and directions where there is a clear consensus, rather than seeking resolution on every single issue1.

Strengthening connectivity around thematic expertise Also highlighted in the SENS Directions Report, and raised at the Unconference, was the potential for social enterprises to develop working groups and collective approaches around specific impact themes (e.g. food security, homelessness, climate change)2. These thematic groups could contribute to building connections with other stakeholders who have a shared investment in their particular activity domains, while also elevating the profile of the sector as a whole.

Knowledge gaps A number of participants highlighted some specific technical challenges and knowledge gaps that they felt the sector faced. These included the challenges of: accessing appropriate forms of funding; measuring and communicating impact; accessing meaningful social procurement opportunities; and building genuine and lasting inter- and intra-sector collaborations.

Where we’d like to be

Unsurprisingly, many of the areas that Unconference participants identified as the greatest strengths of the social enterprise sector were also identified as needing more work. As such, participants were interested in the practicalities of: building meaningful collaborations; accessing the benefits of social procurement; and engaging with First Nations knowledge and experience in a genuinely restorative way. Four areas for future development stood out as particularly important for participants: the role of impact measurement; the need for meaningful partnerships and collaborations; the desire for the sector to grow in the ‘right’ way; and the need for specific resources and sector-building programs.

Impact Measurement and Data There was significant interest in improving the evidence base around the efficacy of social enterprise business models in Australia, potentially through some kind of collaborative or collective approach to measuring impact. These issues are explored in some detail in the SENS Directions Report, which explores the increasing importance of sector-level data, and emerging tensions and challenges regarding what kind of data will lead to meaningful government action, whilst also highlighting potential tensions around who will manage and control it3.

SEWF2022 could provide a useful forum for progressing these conversations within the Australian social enterprise sector, as the input from other jurisdictions could be drawn on to inform these discussions. As well as discussing the issues noted above, it would be valuable to explore the disruptive and/or transformative role that technology might play in sector-wide efforts to measure and communicate impact.

Partnerships, Collaboration and Promotion The need for the social enterprise sector to engage in ambitious partnerships and collaborations featured prominently in discussions and comments. Participants noted the need to work with business and government

on areas of shared interest, while also encouraging ‘mainstream’ businesses to adopt more socially and environmentally appropriate practices. However, the specifics of what this might look like were largely unexplored, aside from rather general ambitions to: lead by example; encourage more social-purpose organisations and socially-motivated businesses to identify themselves as social enterprises; and seek recognition and support from governments where social enterprises are directly addressing gaps in public policy.

Many participants spoke of the need to increase awareness of the social enterprise sector at a broad level (beyond governments), and to communicate its benefits more widely. This includes the type of national-level advocacy and strategy work proposed through the SENS project, and extends through to the marketing and promotion efforts of individual enterprises.

Overall, the sense is that participants see the social enterprise sector in Australia as doing excellent work, but not always communicating this well to stakeholders, supporters, customers or the general public.

The ‘Right’ Kind of Growth Despite a consensus that the social enterprise sector needs to grow, the Unconference also uncovered some notes of concern around the discourses of ‘scaling’ and ‘growth’ that have become commonplace in some parts of the social enterprise sector. Some Unconference participants did not want to see the social

enterprise sector grow at the expense of its diverse, grassroots, participatory and collaborative nature; this might be partially motivated by a (reasonable) fear of the social enterprise sector becoming unduly influenced by a small number of large, powerful entities4.

Sector Supports and Resources Many participants highlighted the perennial and ongoing need for more effective, targeted and sector-specific supports and resources. This included: calls for specialised social enterprise funding; appropriate legal forms; and onthe-ground collaboration from local and state governments. These issues were also covered in the SENS Directions Report, and are likely to be key considerations within the formation of the national social enterprise strategy.

It was clear from several responses that the benefits of social procurement have not always been experienced across the sector, with small and medium-sized enterprises in particular finding it hard to tender for large contracts. To this, we add that the commercial operations of many social enterprises are primarily focussed on retail consumers, rather than other businesses or governments – and that it is therefore important to ensure social procurement is not seen as the only or primary pathway for the sector’s growth.

Recommendations for next steps leading up to SEWF2022 The key insight drawn from the Unconference outputs is that there is a sense of readiness - to grow the sector, to wrestle with tensions and challenges, and to use SEWF2022 as an opportunity to showcase the sector’s achievements.

It’s also clear that the development of a national strategy is coming at an ideal time, with many similarities and parallels between the kinds of issues raised during the SENS consultation process and through the Unconference.

The following recommendations for next steps leading up to SEWF2022 seek to address some of the most pressing areas of concern and commentary from Unconference participants, with a focus on those areas that are within the remit of SEWF to consider acting on5.

1. Decolonise social enterprise It is clear from both the SENS Directions Report6 and the Unconference that engaging meaningfully with First Nations people, organisations, businesses and social enterprises in Australia is an important aspiration for the social enterprise sector. The leadup to SEWF2022 presents a unique opportunity to think about what this really looks like in practice. There is no shortage of exhortations to learn from First Nations perspectives, but what, as a sector, are we giving back? What does it look like to have a social enterprise sector that truly foregrounds social justice for First Nations people? What does this mean for the ways we organise our events, our peak bodies, and our enterprises? Perhaps more importantly, what are non-Indigenous Australians willing to materially contribute - resources, convenience, time, effort – to decolonise social enterprise? Indeed, what could a decolonised Australia look like…?

2. Impact measurement and data – who, what, why?

Collective impact measurement is clearly an area of concern and interest for the social enterprise sector, but it is not entirely clear what is motivating this interest. Are individual social enterprises hoping to reduce the administrative and financial burden of measuring impact by using a common approach? Are intermediaries and other sector-builders hoping to use data to make the case for social enterprise support and investment?

Is this a train of thought and set of assumptions that simply need more discussion and development? The leadup to SEWF2022 is an opportunity to engage the sector in a conversation about these kinds of questions, with a view to convening targeted discussions and (perhaps) working groups around the topic at the conference. The role and potential opportunities provided by technology should be included in these explorations. It may also be productive to organise discussions around specific ‘impact themes’, where enterprises have shared interests and are grappling with common issues, and to consider also collaborating with other types of organisations and stakeholders working towards common impact goals.

3. Plan for systems innovation content and conversations If the calibre of conversation at the Unconference is any guide, the social enterprise sector in Australia is ready for some next-level content and conversations. This could mean masterclass-level content on subjects like complexity, systems innovation, adopting place-based impact models,

and navigating the technicalities and market shaping of impact investment.

There will always be a place for introductory material, but our assessment is that there will also be a significant audience for something more substantial at SEWF2022. It is also worth noting the specific skills and knowledge gaps (see ‘Knowledge Gaps’ heading above) highlighted by Unconference participants, each of which are typically only addressed at an introductory or case-study overview level during SEWF conferences. Given that these gaps persist, one of the key actions leading up to SEWF2022 could be gathering data from the sector to inform what level(s) this type of content should be pitched at.

4. Social procurement… and beyond?

Despite the impressive efforts of intermediaries to elevate social procurement at all levels of business and government, the benefits of social procurement remain skewed towards the interests of larger enterprises. Given this, the lead-up to SEWF2022 could be an ideal time to explore alternative mechanisms and what a small-medium enterprise focused approach to fostering social procurement could look like; and to also consider what an equivalent to social procurement might be for retail-oriented enterprises – for example general awareness raising campaigns that promote the benefits of social enterprise business models, potentially including through a ‘sector branding’ initiative.

Hannant, A., McNeill, J., Burkett, I., Price, A. (2021). Directions Part 1: Perspectives, provocations and sense-making for strategy. Social Enterprise National Strategy (SENS) Project. Brisbane, Australia: The Yunus Centre, Griffith University.

2 Ibid, pp. 83-84.

3 Ibid, pp.78-79 4 Ibid, p.5; p.75.

5 So, for example, we do not necessarily think it would be useful to prioritise or even include debates about the definition of social enterprise even though it was raised as an issue at the Unconference.

6 Ibid, p.79 1

unworthy

Thanks to all our partners