Governance Succession Planning and Diversity

Contact: Paul HillardManaging DirectorIrvine Housing AssociationPaul.Hillard@irvineha.co.uk01294 316781

August 2019

This report was commissioned by G8 Group and researched and produced by North Star Consulting & Research. Originally published in January 2019.

www.northstarcr.com

Contents

1. Introduction 1 1.1 Aims of Project 1

2. Literature Review 2 2.1 Guidance and Regulatory Standards 2 2.2 Diversity and Inclusion 4 2.3 Board Member Remuneration 7 2.4 Board Member Motivations 12 2.5 Co-production 13 2.6 Summary of Key Issues from the Literature 13

3. Board Member Motivations 15 3.1 Key Findings – Board Members 15 3.2 Key Findings – Non-board Members 23 3.3 Key Findings – Future Board Membership 25 3.4 Summary of Key Issues – Board Member Motivations 28

4. Good Practice Examples 30 4.1 Ardenglen Housing Association – TEEN Zone Youth Committee 30 4.2 Home Group – Human Library 32 4.3 Gentoo – Customer Engagement 34 4.4 Grand Union Housing Group – Easy Read 36 4.5 Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing and Olmec – Black on Board 37 4.6 NHS Foundation Trusts 39 4.7 Parkhead Housing Association – Youth Conference 40 4.8 Queens Cross Housing Association– Getting To Know You 41 4.9 Raising Roofs – Preparing Tomorrow’s Leaders for the Board 42 4.10 South Yorkshire Housing Association - LeadWell 43 4.11 Weslo – Board Member Remuneration 44 4.12 Best Practice from the Literature 45

5. Conclusions and Recommendations 47 5.1 Conclusions 47 5.2 Recommendations 51

APPENDIX 1 – LITERATURE SOURCES 52

APPENDIX 2 –BOARD MEMBER MOTIVATIONS METHODOLOGY 54

1

1. Introduction

Irvine Housing Association (IHA) in partnership with Almond Housing Association (AHA), CairnHousing Association (CHA), Clyde Valley Housing Association (CVHA), Fife Housing Group (FHG)and Thenue Housing Association (THA) appointed North Star Consulting & Research to provideconsultancy services in relation to diversity and inclusion in governance succession planning.

1.1 Aims of Project

The key aim of this project is to consider ways of engaging a more demographically and socially diverse range of people in the decision making processes of Housing Association governing bodies into the future. Our focus has been on traditionally ‘hard to reach’ groups such as young people, people of a black and minority ethnic background and people with disabilities, but has also considered all the ‘protected characteristics’ identified in the Equalities Act 2010.

In order to achieve this aim the project has considered:

Good practice examples from other housing and ‘third sector’ organisations

Potential partnerships, or other working arrangements, with organisations and groupsthat engage with ‘hard to reach’ groups

Practice and approaches which aim to ensure a gender balance on governing bodies,particularly those to encourage participation by women

Alternative / non-traditional routes for decision making (i.e. not through a formalBoard / Committee meeting process)

Use of digital communication, including social media

Use of co-production techniques in decision making

Whether or not there is any evidence that paying governing body members is likely tohave a positive effect on attracting and retaining new people.

Our approach included:

A review of national and local policies, frameworks and guidance

A review of academic literature

In depth interviews exploring Board Member experiences, motivations, challenges andbarriers

Good Practice Case Studies

2

2. Literature Review

An integral part of this Governance Succession Planning research is a full and extensive reviewof current literature within the housing sector as well as the wider public sector and thirdsector.

A review of relevant literature has already been carried out by Irvine Housing Association and this section builds upon that. The literature, policy documents, guidance and research which have been reviewed are set out in Appendix 1. The findings present key themes and issues which arise throughout the literature and guidance and these can be grouped under the following headings:

Guidance and Regulatory Standards

Diversity and Inclusion

Board Member Remuneration

Board Member Motivations

Co-production

2.1 Guidance and Regulatory Standards

There are a number of guidance and regulatory documents which outline the role of Boards and the process of Board succession planning for public bodies both at a national and local level. At the national level, the Nolan Committee in 1995 provided standards of conduct for Board members and the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc. (Scotland) Act 2000 introduced the ethical standards framework, which includes Codes of Conduct for Board Members. For the private sector, The UK Corporate Code provides guidance. In addition, this year (2018), the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 was passed in order to ensure equal gender representation on public boards. It sets a goal for gender balance in non-executive membership of public Boards, requiring action to be taken to achieve this. It also requires organisations to encourage applications from the under-represented gender.

The main guidance document on succession planning in Scotland comes in the form of ‘Guidance on Succession Planning for Public Body Boards’ published by the Scottish Government in 2016. The resource provides a ‘toolkit’ of information for practitioners including a checklist, templates, skill matrices, further reading and case studies to help Board members. Integral to the guidance is a sense of the importance that is placed on ensuring Board diversity. The guidance also emphasises that succession planning will differ from body to body and the particular needs of each Board (e.g. particular skill sets) will also differ. As a result, although Scottish Ministers are ultimately responsible for making most public Board appointments, it is recognised that public bodies themselves can do a lot to ensure that when Chair or Board positions do arise, they are prepared to maximise opportunities to attract candidates that meet the body’s needs.

In 2017 the Scottish Government published further guidance designed for members of all Board Members of public bodies; ‘On Board: A Guide for Members of Statutory Boards’. This guidance sets out the roles and responsibilities of Board Members and how public service delivery links to the National Performance Framework. The guidance emphasises the Scottish

3

Government’s commitment to community empowerment as well as best value. Again, diversity is highlighted as being important and Public Boards are expected to give specific consideration to the impact on equality of opportunity when developing policies and making decisions. The Board should also look at how information can be presented to different groups in formats that best suit their needs and find ways of consulting effectively with people with different needs and backgrounds.

For Scottish RSLs, the Regulator of Social Housing’s Governance and Financial Viability Standard Code of Practice, 2015 outlines the expectation that registered providers should have the requisite skills to address the needs of the business. It also requires RSLs to regularly assess whether Boards have the competencies, experience and technical knowledge appropriate to the size, scale and risk profile of the organisation, furthermore, plans should be in place to identify how this can be achieved. The Scottish Housing Regulator’s Regulatory Standards of Governance and Financial Management also requires RSLs to undertake ‘active’ succession planning for the governing body under Regulatory Standard 6.2.

Guidance on Board make up and succession planning specifically for the RSL sector is offered by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations (SFHA) in their document ‘Governing Body Succession Planning and Recruitment Guidance’ published in 2018. The SFHA recognises that although it is a regulatory requirement, it is vital that succession planning is not seen purely as “something we have to do”. This means that succession planning should be highlighted as a key component of good business planning in order to ensure that the organisation understands the range of skills, knowledge and experience required to lead and deliver the achievement of the organisation’s objectives. The guidance highlights two important starting points for effective succession planning: Assessing the current skills, knowledge, experience and diversity that are represented by the governing body and; Considering the ‘fit’ between the current profiles and what is required to deliver the corporate plan.

Also published in 2018, the National Housing Federation (NHF) address the topic of Board composition and the importance of diversity in their ‘Board Appraisal: The Importance of Honest Conversations’ report which discusses the movement away from nominated or elected Board positions to skills or competency based Boards.

Useful information on succession planning at a local level was also produced by the Glasgow and West of Scotland Forum of Housing Associations (GWHA) in 2017. In April 2017, the body carried out a survey of its members to identify what their members are doing in terms of succession planning for their boards and for staff. This was supplemented with follow up interviews with 11 member associations and other professional bodies. Some of the main findings were:

The Community Controlled Housing Associations (CCHA) sector faces a unique set ofchallenges: many of the original cohort of senior staff and board members of a similarage and demographic are preparing to retire or to step away from volunteering onboards.

Recruitment and retention of new board members was identified as the mostconcerning issue in relation to succession planning.

4

Succession Planning for Board Members: Most respondents were already putting intoplace strategies for; identifying particular skills which they want to add to their board,obtaining a better demographic mix and to target particular groups accordingly, and,devising approaches to attract and retain new board members.

Innovative approaches to attracting new Board Members: Some housing associationsare using more innovative methods to attract new members such as flyers,recruitment days, using other networks as communication streams such as residentconsultations and school events.

No tangible ‘hook’ to attract Board Members: respondents agreed that today therewas less of a tangible ‘hook’ for residents to get involved with their local CCHA.Participants referred back to the beginning of the movement when local people hadgot involved to campaign for their communities and to ensure that they got decenthousing and better neighbourhoods. Without this impetus it seemed harder to attractpeople to boards.

Turnover of new Board Members: Respondents reported that new Board Membersturnover was high as a result of the perceptions of the Board as being closed orintimidating. Peer mentors have been used in some cases to address this.

Retaining Board Members: was also highlighted as a concern, retention being lowlargely as a result of the burden of bureaucracy’ and level of commitment required. Toaddress this, solutions included; reducing the length and frequency of meetings,training, mentoring and appraisals.

2.2 Diversity and Inclusion

The need for a Board that is diverse and representative of all its members is emphasised throughout the literature. The Housing Diversity Network’s paper Governance and Diversity in Housing: Why It Matters and Practical Steps to Increase Diversity published in 2015, draws together some of the recent evidence on why diversity is important for strong and successful governance and provides some practical steps for organisations to improve. The paper points out that diversity not only increases the levels of skills and expertise in an organisation but that studies have shown that it also directly leads to business results. However, the paper also finds that most Housing Boards in the UK are not diverse in their make-up, indeed, it argues that in 2014, a typical housing board was chaired by a white British male aged between 50 and 59 years, under representing females, ethnic minorities, and younger and older age groups, and that little has changed since then. A series of recommendations are highlighted to increase equality and diversity on housing boards. These include setting diversity targets, holding consultations with under-represented groups and allowing more flexibility in terms of the location and frequency of meetings. Retaining a diverse Board was also recognised as a problem which should be addressed with suggestions which included the provision of ongoing training and mentoring, providing effective leadership and constantly monitoring Board equality.

A number of other studies have been carried out into the composition and diversity of public Boards. Amongst these is ‘Taken on Trust: The awareness and effectiveness of charity trustees in England and Wales’. The Charity Commission undertook this research in 2017 to understand the characteristics of contemporary trustees in England and Wales and their awareness of their responsibilities and duties. A national survey of almost 20,000 trustees was

5

then carried out. Among the findings, the survey found that men outnumber women trustees two to one, a finding also reflected in the occupants of the role of the chair and the treasurer. Trustees were also found to be drawn from a narrow cross section of the communities that they serve with the vast majority being white British, older and above average income and education. Trustee boards were found to be overly reliant upon fellow trustees for both recruitment of new trustees and for their principal sources of support and advice. The survey also showed that just under a quarter of trustees sit on more than one charity board with an average of 1.35 boards per trustee. Specific skills were highlighted as lacking: legal, digital, fundraising, marketing and campaigning. Overall, the report recommended that more work was needed to encourage trustee boards to actively recruit members from more diverse sections of society.

In his book, Diversity Matters, One Minute Tips on Governance, published in 2014, Governance expert Mark Hudson recognises that the great value of diverse boards is that members bring a range of perspectives to the board, including the perceptions of people of different age, gender, employment, religion, race, etc. however, he also recognises that achieving diversity can be challenging and that Boards must have a clear understanding of their demographics and the skills they require.

Another academic paper ‘When Boards Broaden Their Definition of Diversity, Women and People of Colour Lose Out’ published in the Harvard Business Review in 2018 again puts the case forward for diversity leading to more effectiveness, long term financial success and accountability. However, it also finds that there has been a movement towards the need for technical skills and experience on Boards rather than demographic characteristics in recent years and as a result there has been a slowdown in the rate of appointment of women and other minority groups.

Information on how a Board should effectively improve diversity is provided by a number of different organisations. For example, Creative Scotland have produced Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plans: A Toolkit for Regularly Funded Organisations in order to support regularly funded organisations to develop their Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) action plans. The toolkit provides background information on the link between equality and diversity and artistic endeavours and outlines the key ingredients needed to develop a successful Action Plan. These include the provision of a clear mission statement, the need for strong leadership, setting of timescales, SWOT analyse and evidence gathering. Throughout, the Board should engage and communicate with its members and provide training opportunities and monitoring and reporting on progress.

6

In 2014, the Scottish Government commissioned the Employment Research Institute to carry out research to identify ways in which equalities groups can be better represented at board level in the public, private and third sectors. The resulting report, Overcoming Barriers to Equality and Diversity Representation on Public, Private and Third Sector Boards in Scotland used existing literature to identify how barriers to equality could be overcome. The Key Findings from the Research were:

Background Evidence:o There is a substantial body of evidence that demonstrates that gender diverse

boards have a positive effect on corporate performance.o Public boards have traditionally had a greater proportion of female board

members than private boards.o Private sector companies with gender diverse boards appear to perform better

than those with a lower representation of female board members.o In the international context, countries that have increasingly used legislation

and / or implemented gender quotas have higher levels of female boardroommembership than those that have adopted voluntary approaches.

o A challenge is to increase the supply of women in organisations able to rise toboardroom positions – referred to as the leaking pipeline

Strategies to overcome barriers to equality and diversity on Boards:o Increasing awareness in Public Boards: The research stresses the importance

of recruiting board members from as wide a pool as possible. Thereforeadvertising positions widely is very important.

o Improve Training: Including coaching and workshops on corporate governance;risk management; and the role of the non-executive director. Advice onupdating and rewriting CVs. Advice on targeting a board appointment andaccess to mentoring and networking opportunities.

o Private Boards- Improve the Appointment Process: The process by whichindividuals are appointed to private boards has been criticised as being subjectto ‘’groupthink’’ whereby existing board members appoint those in their ownimage. The research suggests ways of tackling this such as introducing quotas.

o Develop mentoring: There is a significant body of evidence to show thatmentoring is an effective approach to overcome barriers.

o Fix Pipeline Issues: By strategies such as ensuring that the long-list of potentialboardroom candidates includes at least three women, integrating women’scareer development as part of mainstream HR development and providing rolemodels and mentoring.

o Improve Access to Professional Networks: Networks allow contacts to beestablished; knowledge shared; new information acquired; and influenceapplied. Being excluded from influential social networks can mean that womenare less likely to be recommended for unadvertised posts and are excludedfrom lists of potential board candidates. To improve access to influentialnetworks for women, several mentoring schemes and organisations haveestablished programmes to improve access to networks. Schemes includeinvitations to regular social events.

7

o Quotas: In 2003, Norway introduced gender quotas for public and privatesector boards. Quotas were introduced in response to criticism that change inthe gender composition of boards was taking place too slowly. Norwaycontinues to be the most high-profile example of a country where quotas,backed up with the threat of sanctions, has led to a significant increase in therepresentation of women on boards. However, it has taken a decade from theintroduction of the law to achieve 40% female board members.

Another interesting and relevant survey identifies diversity as a important characteristic on public boards, and also highlights that achieving diversity is a problem that is not just experienced in the UK. The US Non-profit organisation Board Source carry out an annual Index of Non Profit Board Practices which tracks trends in Board leadership. The organisation surveys Board chairs and executives from more than 1,300 non-profit organisations to identify insights about their boards’ composition, practices, performance, and culture. The latest survey carried out in 2017, finds that Boards are no more diverse than they were two years ago despite many reporting high levels of dissatisfaction with current board demographics.

A further example of a study looking at how diversity can be improved in Public Boards comes from Australia. Published in 2017, Driving Diversity on Not-for-Profit Boards, Upston et Al, produced this report as part of a project for the Emerging Leaders in Governance Program (ELGP); a program designed for young leaders and professionals to gain knowledge, skills and experience relevant to joining not-for-profit (NFP) Boards in Western Australia. Again the key findings support the view that diversity on a NFP Board can bring about significant positive benefits including an increased reputation and more knowledge. This study emphasised the importance of having a Board that was committed to diversity, and where Board members were encouraged and supported in order to encourage retention.

2.3 Board Member Remuneration

One idea explored in the literature is around the introduction of financial incentives in order to encourage and retain Board members from diverse backgrounds, which is permitted under the Regulatory Standards of Governance and Financial Management, Scottish Housing Regulator. Sections 5.13 to 5.17 of the SHR Regulatory Standards of Governance and Financial Management provide guidance on Board Member remuneration:

5.13 The Act does not restrict or prohibit payments and benefits to governing body members and employees. So it is for each RSL to decide if, and how, it wants to manage payments and benefits to its governing body members, staff, and their close relatives. Where an RSL exercises its discretion and does decide to make such payments we require it to do so within a clear policy framework to make sure it acts with transparency, honesty and propriety and avoids any public perception of improper conduct. Where an RSL has subsidiaries it must ensure any payments and benefits to subsidiary governing body members are included in the policy. Charitable RSLs also need to be mindful of complying with the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005 and any associated guidance from the charity regulator when considering payments or benefits to charity trustees.

8

5.14. We require any RSL intending to pay its governing body members to take account of independent guidance and good practice in setting payment amounts and linking payments to specified duties. There must also be a clear process for assessing performance in carrying out these duties. The RSL must also publish details of all governing body payments in its annual accounts.

5.15. The Act also permits employees to become executive members of the governing body (if the RSL’s constitution permits that). In such a case, we require these executive governing body members to be in the minority, not to hold any office and not to be able to form a quorum. The Chair must always be a nonexecutive member. Executive members of the governing body should not receive any additional payment for their governing body role, over and above what they are entitled to under their contract of employment.

5.16. Governing body payments and employee remuneration are matters for the governing body. But RSLs use significant sums of taxpayer money and this comes with responsibilities around restraint and economic effectiveness. We will hold an RSL to account and may take regulatory action if we consider, with regard to industry standards and set scales, that an RSL has made excessive payments to either its governing body members or employees.

5.17. We require any concerns raised by auditors to an RSL about its approach to this area to be treated as “of material significance” in terms of section 72 of the Act and reported to us.

Under the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005, charity trustees are permitted to be remunerated for services provided to the charity in certain circumstances. In order for remuneration to be permitted, the maximum amount of remuneration must be set out in a written agreement between the charity and the service provider and it must be reasonable in the circumstances. Any remuneration agreement must be in the best interests of the charity. Fewer than half of the charity trustees at any one time can be remunerated and there are provisions for connected parties to be taken into account when considering who is or is not being remunerated by the charity.1

The effectiveness of Board remuneration has been explored in two studies; Board Member Pay: What Housing Associations Need to Know, published by the National Housing Federation (NHF) in March 2014 along with work carried out on Board Pay Findings by Campbell Tickell in 2018.

The NHF Study includes the findings from a survey of 210 members of the English Housing Association sector in 2013. The survey found that the majority of respondents were paying board members, but cautions that the fact that so many associations do pay board members should not be taken to mean that the decision making process is any easier and that each organisation needs to ensure it has fully considered its own position and has fully scrutinised any proposal to introduce payment. The survey found that 80% of associations in England which now pay board members are charitable.

1 https://www.turcanconnell.com/media/3229/turcan-connell-guide-to-charities-trustees-investment.pdf

9

The NHF raise the issue of dealing with conflicts of interest when making a decision to pay board members and suggests one or more of the following options should be in place to manage these conflicts of interest:

Paying some rather than all board members, with remuneration decisions being takenby those who are not paid

The payment scheme being approved by members at an Annual or Special Generalmeeting where board members who would benefit do not participate or vote inrelation to the proposals

Having a separate remuneration or governance committee with delegated authority toapprove payment levels

The NHF found a correlation between the size of the association and whether payments were made to board members with a threshold of around 3,500 to 4,000 units at which associations consider payment of board members.

NHF Survey respondents held common considerations in deciding whether to pay or not. Those reasons for not paying board members included:

Counter to values and ethos of the not for profit sector. Many felt it important topreserve the ethos of volunteering within the community over promoting self interest

Non-payment provides a strong foundation of respectability, an important ingredientto achieve acceptance of the organisations aims by the wider public

No difficulties in recruiting and retaining good board members, with high qualityapplicants

Too small an organisation to consider payment

Concerns about the impact including issues of equity, fairness, cost and value formoney

Board members consider the approach inappropriate – particularly tenant boardmembers

Resources are spent on developing and supporting existing board members

Money may by skill, but not necessarily commitment and passion

Those organisations which do pay board members did so to:

Improve engagement

Attract a greater number of applicants to provide more diversity and choice

Recruit and retain applicants with relevant skills

Reflect the time commitment and to put the posts on a more professional footing

Raise attendance levels and to ‘create a culture of obligation through psychologicalcontract’

Reinforce the need for good performance and support management of poorperformance

Increase board attendance, participation and performance

Reflect the input of the chair

10

When associations considered the positive impact of board remuneration the following effects were found:

Improved recruitment – more applicants in terms of quality, diversity and number

Reduction in the average age of board members with increased interest in paid postsby younger applicants

Improved performance and input

Securing board members better equipped to deal with the challenges of complexbusiness activity

A reduction in the number of people involved in the governance structure

Increased experience and professionalism

More effective management of poor attendance and performance

Achieving a ‘one team’ feeling between the executive and non-executive

Shift of mind set from volunteering to more professional

Greater commitment to personal and collective development

Greater debate and challenge

When associations considered the negative impact of board remuneration the following effects were found:

Increased costs and administrative burden on payroll system

Loss of board members where payment affected their benefits

Non paid board members feeling that a range of activities is the responsibility of thepaid members not the whole board

Tensions between paid and non-paid members

Initial shift to paid members feeling they had to be more hands on in the business inreturn rather than remaining strategic

Disagreement in principle by tenants and residents

Some applicants being put off by the position being paid rather than voluntary

An increase in unsuitable applicants

An increase of ‘infighting’ by members to position themselves for the paid position

Difficulties in persuading people to stand down, some wanting to complete their nineyears – increasing the importance of a robust appraisal system

The NHF states that: ‘the case for payment of board members is not, and never has been, limited to a case for paying the whole board. Associations should consider the different ways in which they can remunerate their board members and whether they should pay all or some of their board members’.

The NHF also suggest that sector norms provide useful information when deciding levels of remuneration it is appropriate to consider a number of other factors including:

Levels of year on year increase are appropriate

Any changes which take place, such as significant reduction in board structure/ size

The total cost of board pay

Decision making processes

11

Business objectives

The management consultancy firm Campbell Tickell have also carried out research into the use and effectiveness of housing board remuneration in early 2018. They conducted a survey in which over 150 organisations across England responded. The research found that 64% of Boards remunerate all of their board members. Chair pay range from £12,000 per annum in the South East to £20,000 in Greater London. Board Member pay ranged from £4,600 in the South West to £8,500 in Greater London. The larger the organisation, both in terms of turnover and stock, the larger the pay awarded. Overall, 60% of respondents experienced a positive impact as a result of the introduction of payment. Positive impacts included; better quality of candidates, better skills, commitment, attendance and professionalism.

During our research we also consulted with Saxton Bampfylde Recruitment Consultants to the housing sector. They confirmed that in their experience following the widespread introduction of board member remuneration in England the calibre of applicants has improved.

12

2.4 Board Member Motivations

A US study Board Membership Motivations: A Research Project on Individual Motivations for Nonprofit Board Membership, Miller-Stevens and Ward, Old Dominion University published in 2013, looks specifically at what motivates people to become Board Members of Not for Profit organisations using focus groups and an online survey. The following findings are of relevance to our literature review:

Board members are attracted to join through:o a good organisational fito values that are in line with the organisation and its missiono knowledge and skills that will benefit the board and the organisationo the ability to think strategicallyo good decision-making skills and forward thinking

Retaining board members by:o creating positive working relationships between the board and the CEOo encouraging standing committees to be involved in the decision-making

processo making board members feel respectedo making board members feel useful and appreciatedo encouraging individuals to be innovative and apply their knowledge and skills

to generate ideas, actions, or products that will benefit the organisation

Characteristics of Board members: In the Not for Profit sector - according to this study,Board Members were; highly compassionate, moderately interested in publicpolicymaking (but understand politics and politicking), moderately willing to self-sacrifice, and highly committed to the public interest.

13

2.5 Co-production

Co-production is gaining momentum in reforming public services and it may have the potential to transform public services and change the relationship between those who provide services and those who use them.

There are various definitions of Co-production provide by agencies in Scotland:

The Health and Social Care Alliance2 describe co-production as: ‘The relationship between those who provide services and those who use them drawing on their combined knowledge, abilities and resources to develop joint solutions which achieve better health and wellbeing outcomes for people and improve service efficiency. Effective co-production rebalances the traditional scales of power between providers and users; with health and care institutions and professionals ceding power and citizens being empowered to fully engage and participate in decisions about their own care, including self-management.

Co-production Scotland3 describes co-production as: ‘A relationship between service provider and service user that draws on the knowledge, ability and resources of both to develop solutions to issues that are claimed to be successful, sustainable and cost-effective, changing the balance of power from the professional towards the service user. The approach is used in work with both individuals and communities.’

Co-production Scotland’s vision is: ‘All people are valued and supported to meaningfully participate in shaping and delivering services, building and strengthening their communities, and creating change.’

The Scottish Co-production Network4 describes co-production as ‘Co-production is a way for those who run public services and those who use them, to come together to make the most their own skills and ideas to improve how services work’

2.6 Summary of Key Issues from the Literature

From the literature review we have found that there is a significant amount of guidance and advice on succession planning for voluntary boards. The two key principles of succession planning involve an assessment of current skills and experience alongside analysis of what will be required to meet the future needs of the organisation.

While the guidance is clear on what should happen, organisations often struggle to attract interest in board positions from applicants with the required skills. There is a need for a systematic and co-ordinated approach to board recruitment with innovative and inclusive approaches being adopted. In Chapter Four of this report we provide some examples of innovative solutions which have been developed across the sector.

2 https://www.alliance-scotland.org.uk/self-management-and-co-production-hub/co-production/ 3 http://www.coproductionscotland.org.uk/about/what-is-co-production/

4 https://www.scdc.org.uk/what/co-production-scotland

14

Retention of board members is also a struggle, particularly for tenant members, and issues cited tend to relate to the bureaucracy, the skills and time commitment required. Chapter Three of this report explores board member motivations in more detail.

Diversity on a voluntary board is widely recognised as bringing a series of benefits including the provision of a wide range of perspectives to board decision making; ensuring that all elements of the community are heard; an increase in the range of skills, experience and expertise; improved performance overall; improved governance and greater productivity. Despite this, a number of studies describe the typical board as comprised of middle aged, white British males from a limited range of professional backgrounds.

Co-production is an emerging approach which could have the potential change the relationship between those who provide services and those who use them. It is at an early stage of development and requires high levels of interaction with customers, an understanding of the customer journey and their needs.

15

3. Board Member Motivations

The literature cites a number of reasons as to why an individual may or may not want to join aPublic Board. In order to further explore this we carried out in depth semi-structuredinterviews with twenty research participants.

Half of the participants were people who currently serve (or who have served in the past) asboard members in third sector organisations and the housing sector. The other half wereyoung people with the skillsets to undertake a board member position i.e. property workers,architects, health and safety auditors, homelessness officers, social policy & social sciencesgraduates and post graduates, and finance graduates. The methodology used in described indetail in Appendix 2 and the key findings are set out below.

3.1 Key Findings – Board Members

3.1.1 Attractions of the Role

Board Members were asked what attracted them to the role. Participants mentioned that being on the board gave them the opportunity to shape the strategy of the organisation and have more input on the course it takes.

“As a board member you can govern the course of the organisation. I wanted to have an input to the actions taken. Without being a board member, I wouldn’t know how to address existing difficulties”.

Participants also mentioned investing in the community the organisation serves and its political outcome. Participants said that they felt that being on the governing body of a particular organisation would make a real impact and difference to their community

“I wanted to be involved in activities in my community so I could improve people’s lives… It’s cool to get involved in groups that use their space to do community work.”

“I was attracted to it politically. I wanted to get involved with this particular charity as the system was getting progressively worse with the rise of the Tories. I had experience with the benefits system so had my family.”

Some participants also mentioned that they had a personal investment in the project which played a major role in their decision to become board members. Some Participants had been involved with an organisation for a long time when they decided to make the move to a governing position, as it felt to them like a natural transition.

”It didn’t make sense to be part of the organisation for a long time without moving to a governing position”

“I had a personal investment in the project. I was involved for a long time.”

16

Participants also said that they had a specific interest in the organisation for which they served as board member, stating that they agreed with their broader values and the level of care for their service users.

‘’I consider the organisation very unique. It is not just a charity that runs projects just to justify its funding. On the contrary, I respect their work. They actually help their service users.”

“This Housing Association development trust is a particularly good housing association. I didn’t want to be involved with any Housing Association only this particular one. They have good values”.

Two participants moved to a trustee position as a result of the organisation trying to diversify its board. They said:

“The charity was working on diversifying its board members so they won’t be just older white men. They understand that not only white men are affected by psychosis. They wanted to reach out to a range of people. I was a General Member and they pretty much found me. They saw my activity on Twitter regarding mental health.”

“They considered me for the role because they wanted to diversify their board members”

Two participants mentioned that when they undertook this role when they decided to leave their employment with the charity, and that they saw being on the board as a way to remain active in the organisation because of the flexibility of the role.

“I was working in this charity and I had to leave the post, so they suggested to me to serve as a board member”

“It is something you can do without having to be here. It is a bit more flexible “.

Some participants saw serving as a board member as part of a whole process, aiming to work with and empower a specific group that was previously under-represented in the area that the charity focused on. Two participants took part in creating a charity that aimed to open a dialogue and increase representation for people of colour in film production. Creating a charity gave them the chance to create more opportunities for this group of people.

“Before we become a charity, I was in involved in film and festival productions for 15 years and women of colour had zero representation in film production.”

3.1.2 Future Board Membership

When asked if they would consider being a Board Member in the future four of the ten participants answered ‘yes’. Comments included:

‘’I would probably become a board member for another organisation or start my own charity with all the experience I’ve got from this role. Having done it now, I see where the rewards are”

17

Six of the ten participants said ‘’maybe’’, depending on life circumstances and whether they found an organisation with “principles they agree with”.

3.1.3 Motivation for Board Membership

When asked about their motivations when deciding to serve on the Board, six of the participants said that the position gave them the freedom to contribute more to the organisation and also help to shape its aims. They said:

“I wanted to be part of the decision-making process”

“Again, being part of the board gives me the freedom to contribute more. I did enjoy the role once I got experience but that actually came later”

“To shape the organisation I am a part of.”

‘’Serving as board member would give the opportunity to be part of advancing this project”

Participants felt that by undertaking this position they would be able to offer their skills to the service and the community. In relation to skills we also found that the participants were motivated to undertake the role as it offered them skills development. Comments included:

“I have the opportunity to share my skills “

‘’On a more selfish level being a board member is fantastic work experience for any charity or any organisation/company really. You have that management experience and that’s a transferrable skill.”

“A friend recommended that I should become a board member a while ago when I was asking them for career development advice. They were involved with H.As. They said that I should consider becoming a board member, as I would enjoy it, and I do enjoy the role a lot.”

“I also thought that it would give me skills i.e. accountancy skills. It would offer me an opportunity to learn strategies on running and maintaining an organisation.”

Among the motivations mentioned above, participants talked about how important the principles of the organisation they are involved are for them. They saw the organisation as a meaningful way to effect change and make an impact:

“It is an arms-length management organisation that provides opportunities to recruit people with long term unemployment. I wanted to get involved with this particular organisation because they have good values.”

“When I joined this charity, I was unhappy with certain things in society and I saw this organisation as a way to do something about this.”

18

“My main motivation is that I wanted to invest in a space where people talk about poverty and understand it.”

Participants also referred to political motivations:

“I had a political motivation to understand and fight the benefits system”

Participants also wanted to get involved in something that directly concerns them. They wanted to make a real difference in their local community.

‘’Direct participation was a motivation for me”

‘’The opportunity the role offers to be part of the community and improve their sense of wellbeing “

‘’It’s the enjoyment of meeting people. The Housing Association organises lots of events, you feel part of the community. Lot to take from; it improves your wider sense of wellbeing. It’s not only older people that feel isolated. Young people feel isolated as well”.

One participant said they didn’t feel particularly motivated at the beginning. However, the fact that there was a diverse range of board members was helpful to improve their motivation:

“To be honest, I needed lots of encouragement to do this. I had to travel and attend an interview and all that sounded very formal. I was motivated after. The board was diverse; there are people who are mental health professionals and people with lived experiences as service users in the mental health system. That definitely helped.”

3.1.4 Challenges Maintaining the Role

Half of the participants said that challenges in maintaining their role as Board Member related to difficulties in time and energy commitment while others said that organising, meetings and travelling were all part of the broader volume of work they undertook for this role. Participants said they found managing the work load and time commitment challenging. Especially given that many were also involved in other projects and in full time employment.

19

Figure 3.1 Challenges in Maintaining Role

One participant that there are other things they would like to give their energy. One found short notice of meetings made it difficult to attend. Lack of finances were also cited as a problem with costs being incurred by the Board Member. Participants also cited difficulties associated with the position being unpaid and the travelling time required to attend meetings. Among other reasons they mentioned travelling time as a challenge.

Comments included:

‘’It’s hard to invest lots of time and energy unpaid”

“I had to stop and start again [my role as a board member] because I had no time and money to manage all my other responsibilities as well as this role”

‘’I left because frankly I wanted to be able to be paid as a manager of the charity. As I said, managing the time commitment was really difficult without being paid.”

“Another challenge is to maintain my role due to work commitments. I work full time while I am a board member. It can also be a challenge for me to attend regular meetings for the same reason.”

“Meetings over Skype, travelling to see people was hard.”

‘’They are not very good at keeping in contact. [There is] not enough notice for meetings. For me, it it’s not a matter of no having enough training or learning as I’ve been working in housing for years. It’s more a matter of attending the meetings as they are not good at giving notice.”

“Having to travel so far 4 times a year is definitely a challenge. The organisation is trying to help and encourage young board members that have not done this before. My role involves knowledge of financial tasks that I was not familiar with before.’’

20

“The organisation doesn’t have enough money. You can see the potential but it is impossible to meet all the needs’’

One raised the challenge of developing an in depth understanding of administration and financial management. Participants also said that they found the amount of responsibility tiring, citing it as one of the reasons that contributed to them leaving the post. It seems that the legal responsibilities to which all board members of a charity are liable to was another contributing factor to people deciding to leave the position. In some cases, the participants said that it was challenging to fully understand the role and the structure of the charity. As board members, they needed to have an understanding of policies and specialist knowledge outside of their field of expertise. As these examples showed:

‘’I suppose, trying to fully understand all the ins and outs of the charity, i.e. the completion of accounts, was difficult.‘’

‘’Finance can definitely be a challenge. I feel I’ve lost my way sometimes in meetings when it comes to finance management. However, it’s a good learning tool”

Other barriers to retention stemmed from the culture of the organisation. For example one participant said that the organisation was all-inclusive and did not create any barriers for retention:

“There were no barriers serving as a board member, it is an all-inclusive organisation. They would take into account people’s needs i.e. mobility needs. I knew if I had a child, I would get support to attend the meetings”

Other participants talked about institutional barriers within charities they have served as board members. Specifically, they mentioned gender barriers for women and the lack of direct rotation:

“After I got involved there were barriers to remaining on the board. It is easy to leave because you feel you are not listened to. If it is the same for younger people it is really difficult for new board members to remain because they feel that their opinion won’t be heard by other board members that have been in this post for years.”

“It’s hard to feel that you are listened to [by other board members] if you are a woman.”

Finally, one service user participant mentioned internal challenges such as difficulties in managing their mental health:

“I think at times, the challenges are internal, my own mental health. I think I wasn’t good at being objective and calm. I’ve realised that’s not really helpful being on the board at all.”

Participants also said that they found how relations in the Board were formed challenging. Some felt that arguments arose because of the age gap on the board and by differences of opinion. They indicated that it can be difficult to resolve conflict as not everyone respects democratic based decisions. They said:

21

“I think board member politics, especially when you have board members that come from different generations and different backgrounds. Their opinions can be quite different.”

“Actually, having democratic based decisions [was a challenge]. The board consists of different people with different levels of involvement. People don’t see the point of following democratic decisions. They will force their own opinion.”

3.1.5 Rewards of the Role

When asked what they found most rewarding about voluntary Board/ Committee Membership five of the ten participants mentioned that through the role they are able to contribute constructive guidance about the direction the organisation takes. They said:

“The fact that I can contribute and start a dialogue about the decisions taken.”

“Same as my motivation, having control and shaping the aims of the organisation.”

Participants said that by being on the board they gain the knowledge to contribute something useful. They can offer their skills to their community:

“It’s great to be able to shape things in a collaborative way, have a word in our community, to be able to address grievances in society.”

They can also put their skills to good use so they can support new volunteers and shape the aims of the organisation

“I just really like supporting new volunteers teaching them how to do things and watching them get better and watching them become independent and not needing the help of others and feel confident. That’s really rewarding. Seeing people developing and moving on to their next roles and even become board members. It’s great to see that. It’s fantastic. It ties with what we want to do in this charity. We get volunteers from the community that then become board members. I think that’s fantastic”

Responses show that being part of a charity board is a collaborative way to shape the aims of the organisation and at the same time a way to connect with the community. Most of the participants were passionate about the aims of the organisation:

“It’s a really good project, it creates employment opportunities. I feel I am involved with housing; it keeps you in touch with reality. That makes me feel good about having opinions I can put in good use.”

“Basically, the fact that I can contribute and start a dialogue about the decisions taken. As a former employee I can bring a real reflection of the needs of the charity. Sometimes boards are unable to see the real needs. I can make suggestions about funding, where to channel our resources etc.”

22

We also saw that people appreciate the partnerships they can form and that they can work with a range of people and ages with different experiences and skills:

“Partnership with people whose ideas I value and I respect”

“Different perspectives are rewarding. I am trained in mental health interventions with people that have been affected by psychosis. I also know how psychosis affects poorer people and its relation to institutional racism”

“I think strategic conversations [were rewarding]. We had an older member with lots of experience that was the sustainability officer. He added a voice of experience. Age range was really important for our structure and it was really rewarding to work with different age groups”

One participant mentioned that they found the structure of the charity rewarding as it is an all-inclusive organisation. They felt that this particular organisation was inclusive of people from different socio-economic backgrounds as they offered the role of board member without having to go through complex application processes which cemented the participant’s decision to join the governing body.

One felt supported by other Board Members and stated:

‘’New members can ask any other member of the board who is familiar with those tasks and that is something that the organisation encourages us to do. Also, new board members have assigned buddies that help them understand their role and offer them support. Mine is a really experienced member.”

3.1.6 Suggested Changes

When asked if there is anything they would change about their current role to make it more rewarding or easier to undertake three participants said that they would change how the roles on the board work. They thought that problems can occur due to the duality of the roles that people have on the board; often roles are not defined clearly enough or there are skills that only a few people on the board have and that leads to people having duality of roles.

“The problem is the duality of roles, if you fulfil two roles unpaid it can be problematic. Ideally, board members should make sure the ethos of the charity is kept; they should offer advice and guidance. It would be really useful to have some highly experienced board members, like specialised lawyers or advisers with 20 years of experience. In practice though, if board members are not involved with the charity’s day to day tasks, they lose touch.’’

One participant suggested that the Board of the charity they are involved with would benefit from having a broader range of people that can create different dynamics and therefore improve the existing governing body.

‘’With board members, different dynamics work better, a broader range of people, like highly specialised advisory board and workers would be ideal.”

23

Another participant thought that in order to make the role easier to undertake, they should focus on:

”Creating a strategy to empower those who are not on the board [but work in the service] to undertake the role and to feel more confident.’’

Participant responses indicated that there is need for more training that would assist new board members to get a grasp of charitable accounting:

“Free courses in charitable accounting, funding for smaller level charities as well as cross sector. The majority of charities have people on their board that make personal sacrifices and funding bodies need to support them”

“For me, it needs to be more training - some Housing Associations do induction and training but not all of them.”

Another suggestion was to create a bigger Board:

“We were six or seven on the Board. If we were up to 10, the workload would be less and easier to undertake”.

3.2 Key Findings – Non-board Members

3.2.1 Consideration of Board Membership

Two of the ten participants said that they had considered serving as a voluntary Board member. Both had experience working in sectors related to housing. They had seen this post as having the potential to improve career development. Both mentioned time as a barrier in terms of employment and studies. They also mentioned the times that the board meetings are held:

“Board meetings are held in the evenings and I have family commitments. Even if they provided child care it wouldn’t solve the problem. In the evenings you want to take your kids to swimming, put them to bed. A child minder wouldn’t do that. Child care finishes at a certain time.”

“The main reason is time to do it, in the past I was working in practice, I was working part time while doing my PhD, I wouldn’t have the time”

Other reasons why one participant did not proceed is related to social barriers and lack of information. This person thought:

‘’People of colour would not consider taking on a role like this, because people of colour themselves don’t know that a position on the board could be a choice for them.’’

“There are also social barriers. It’s not for a black person. A black person would never think that it’s a career path available for them. They don’t know they can become board members. There

24

is not enough information. There are certain social boxes you have to tick, like older, white etc…It looks like you have to be certain about the role, like really experienced old people can only undertake the role. I don’t know if it intentional from the services and the governing bodies but it comes across like this.”

Another participant said that there is not enough information provided about the role. They were not sure what the role entails:

‘’They advertise for board members but they don’t say what it entails what skills they want you to have”.

Responses indicated many perceived barriers to becoming a board member. Some of the participants felt that they were too young to be on the board and that this is a role taken up by older and more experienced professionals. Another barrier presented was the volume of responsibility that people had to undertake as a board member:

“Also, as a charity member, if a charity fails you are legally accountable. Young people haven’t experienced that form of responsibility.”

The participants said that time commitment was a barrier for them to undertake the role. One participant said:

“I don’t have enough time. I don’t feel you can do it at the same time as working. There are so many things competing with your free time. They have to make it feel really worthwhile.”

Participants also mentioned the fact that they felt that boards are focused mainly on administrative and managerial tasks. Participants said that they thought that the board is detached from the day to day work the charity does and the experience of the workers. This functioned as a barrier for people with experience in the third sector to undertake a board member role.

“My impression of boards is that they have more of a legalistic function. After having worked in a charity for years I have never met a board member, they are separated positions and I’ve never been told what discussions take place in board meetings. I received an email regarding a position within the board but I didn’t even consider it because of reasons stated above. I would find it amazing if issues within the organisation were brought to a decision making body.”

“Boards are really far away from the volunteers and worker’s reality. Their work is managerial and admin focused. I think I have nothing to offer. What they miss is diversity and input from people that do grassroots work.”

“The things that attract me to my current voluntary commitments: directly helping people in need, being out and about in the community and opportunity for skills development, don’t really strike me as things I would get out of being a charity board member.”

25

3.3 Key Findings – Future Board Membership

3.3.1 Attracting Younger Board Members

Participants were asked how a charity and its governing body might accommodate younger people to undertake the role as a board member. Participants said that the organisation needed to provide training and consistent skills development to its board so younger people could feel more comfortable to undertake the role. One suggestion was that the organisation could have a recruitment day with training and information about what the position entails, this may lead to people having an extra incentive to become involved.

Another suggestion was that board members should be paid:

“I would say they need to pay their board members. Unless there is some sort of profit, people won’t do it. Have some sort of incentive. You will find people who are passionate but not enough to fill all the positions.”

Participants also mentioned that a way to accommodate younger people to undertake the role was to:

‘’Break the stereotype created around age: that you need to be really old to be a board member. Ageism is the main reason why a younger person wouldn’t think to serve as a board member. It really depends on the type of organisation but it is important for the board member to have a deep understanding of the needs of the group the organisations works with. Charities need to offer a platform for younger people”

Shadowing meetings or making an introductory membership was another suggestion that participants made:

“It should be possible to have people who work in the charity to shadow meetings. There should a worker’s representative on the board. A person that is elected, like a low level worker if possible.”

“Perhaps making an introductory membership where members can step in and out of meetings, freely, perhaps sit as observers for a period.”

Two participants suggested that third sector organisations and Housing Associations should digitise their work as much as possible in order to make procedures and meeting less time consuming and more accessible.

“Commitment for people with children is trouble. Attending regular meetings and commuting is difficult. Housing Associations have to adapt to technological advancement. That will reduce travel time. They need to support electronic documentation. That reduces the time load. If you have all the paperwork available online and you can make comments online that would save lots of time. You can be accessible on the phone. That’s how you can attract young board members”

26

“Digitising as much of the work as possible (open source digital democracy platforms and chat forums / Facebook).”

Two participants suggested that organisations need to improve information about the role. They suggested that they need to be more transparent in relation to the description of the position to make it less intimidating for young people:

“First of all, they have to demystify what it means to be on the board. People are intimidated. I don’t know what I expected. They need to put a lot of work in the housing sector, to demonstrate that they listen to people and their needs. All the time the sector is talking about how to get younger people involved but it never seems to happen. Not sure why that is. Perhaps it is the time, they need to make it so people can fit in their lives. If you work full time, have a family, studies, or are a carer, becoming a board member is something people won’t do.’

‘Housing Associations have lots of older people on the board and if you are a young person on the board, you have to work in a room with people with lots of years of experience, I can see how that is intimidating, it would be for me. If you are on the board, you tend to gravitate to someone who has similar experience to you, because we tend to do that. Do you want to bring someone who is going to want to change things or do you want stability?”

One participant stated the importance of the content of the adverts used to attract people:

“It has to do with the message the housing associations give when they advertise for board members. The advert has to be attractive. The way that the post is advertised should be outside the box. People from BME backgrounds have lots of skills i.e. engineering, finance, social work. Unfortunately, these skills are not utilised. The content of the advert has to be attractive for a BME person to consider applying for it. I am not saying that they should lower the standards. For example, see how Shelter advertises for volunteering positions. If you place advertisements for charities and compare them with those of Housing Associations you will see they are rigid. After all being a board member is a voluntary position and they should treat it like one.”

3.3.2 Advertising Board Opportunities

Participants were asked where they would expect to find opportunities advertised if they were interested in becoming a voluntary Board/ Committee member of an RSL (or other 3rd sector organisation). The most common answer, mentioned by 15 participants (eight board members and seven non board members) was that they expected to find roles advertised online. Of those, six (five board members, and one non-board member) specifically mentioned the website “Goodmoves” https://goodmoves.com/ which describes itself as ‘the premier careers hub for the civil society, charity and voluntary sector – run by the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations’.

The next most frequently mentioned method of finding roles advertised online was by looking on the website of the organisation directly, with six (one board member and five board members) mentioning this, as well as three board members who specifically mentioned “contacting” organisations for information about joining the board. Other sites which were

27

mentioned were: Twitter, Facebook, Creative Scotland and the Glasgow Council for the Voluntary Sector Newsletter.

In terms of non-online methods of advertisement three participants (one board member and two non-board members) said that they would expect to hear by word of mouth or through their networks about new opportunities. Two non-board members mentioned advertisement through printed formats such as newspapers and magazines. One non-board member felt that this method of advertising was important, stating:

“If you really want reach to people, you should use media that is not only online.”

One board member thought that:

“Every field needs to follow an appropriate advertisement strategy to reach out to people. For example, with housing I would expect to find opportunities through my community, in the mail, in my close etc.”

One non-board member stated:

“It’s about the content of the advert not about the media through which it is advertised. I see ads all the time but the content stops me from applying.”

3.3.3 Length of Service

All twenty participants were asked how long they would expect to serve on a voluntary Board or Committee.

Figure 3.2 Expected Length of Service

Some participants who were current board members said that they could be on the board for indefinite time. One said:

28

“I guess, as long as I felt invested in it and like I was getting something out of it, I’ve never been involved with a charity any more than a couple of years, mostly because I had trouble managing time commitments, or life changes like moving cities happened.”

‘’In my current role as a board member I don’t see a limit. I really enjoy it.”

Other participants said that it is important to rotate the role, so they would stay no more than 3 years:

“Generally, 2-3 years. You don’t want people to be board members for too long. You want objectivity and new ideas.

3.3.4 Time Commitment

All twenty participants were asked how much time commitment they would expect to be involved in serving on a voluntary board. Participants were offered a number of options to select. Sixty five per cent (65%) of respondents would expect the role of Board Member to require 12 days a year or less. Overall 30% thought that the time commitment should be six days a year or less. Twenty five per cent (25%) thought that more than 21 days a year would be required.

Figure 3.3 Expected Time Commitment

3.4 Summary of Key Issues – Board Member Motivations

Our research found a wide range of reasons why people become involved in voluntary boards. These included: investing in their community; giving something back to the community, being able to shape the direction of the organisation; and for personal or career development. Of those who have served on a voluntary board 40% would consider doing so again in the future.

29

The key challenges associated with board membership were: having a lack of time or energy; the level of responsibility associated with the role; the skills required; institutional barriers such as the culture of the board; and practical issues such as travel expenses and childcare arrangements and costs.

Participants suggested advertising of opportunities should be done through the SCVO website; on the RSLs own website; through existing contacts and networks; and through advertising in printed media. Any advert should make it clear about the expectations and time commitment of the role. Induction and training are also crucial in attracting and retaining members.

Time commitment is a key area where we found a mismatch between how much time participants thought they could dedicate to the role and the reality of what is likely to be required under existing structures.

30

4. Good Practice Examples

In this section we provide a number of good practice examples which provide solutions to thekey issues raised through the literature review. The findings are drawn from semi-structuredtelephone interviews with each of the organisations where good practice has been highlighted.

4.1 Ardenglen Housing Association – TEEN Zone Youth Committee

TEEN Zone was formally constituted in February 2012 following an engagement and consultation exercise with young people in the community. Ardenglen found that the majority of our young people (mainly young males) said that there was no provision of free or affordable football or access to an area where they could play safely. At that time all of Castlemilk’s schools had been re-built and the cost to hire the football grounds was very expensive and unaffordable and unless the young people were part of a football group, this was a major barrier.

In light of the lack of these facilities and the high levels of vandalism and youth disorder the association began to work with A&M Training (a football charity) to look at a programme that would provide outcomes identified. As a constituted group they were able to apply for the necessary funding.

The aim of the group is: To promote and enhance youth activities and events in the local community which have been identified by the participants themselves. The objectives are to:

Secure funding for delivery of their own projects

Develop & up-skill members of the committee and their programmes participants

Partner with young people not engaging in existing youth provision

Challenge negative perceptions about young people

Create an environment that is welcoming and fully inclusive

Over the years Ardenglen has worked with young people aged 10 to 23 and has recorded many positive impacts not only for the youth committee but also for Ardenglen. These include:

Developing new and innovative ways of communicating with the community

Broadening understanding of what is important to local people

A thoroughly enjoyable and rewarding way of working

Delivering regeneration projects which are fresh and exciting

TEEN Zone are helping Ardenglen to realise our mission statement ”Investing in ourCommunity”

Comments about TEEN Zone from the young people involved include:

‘Great to use on personal statements and job interviews. Makes us more interesting and enabling us to create positive pathways to further education, apprenticeships or full time employment’

31

‘It is great to have your voice heard in the community’

‘It is great to be able to mix with people from other age groups as this wouldn’t happen otherwise!’

‘We are learning while having fun along with making positive social connections’

‘Being involved is a great way for us to build on our skills.’

Ardenglen described two main challenges in developing TEEN Zone. The first was the idea that it would feed into the succession strategy for board recruitment. In reality most of the young people moved onto positive destinations such as university, full time employment, volunteering abroad which resulted in them leaving the area. While this has resulted in numbers dropping there is a strong desire within the remaining members to set up peer mentoring/succession to engage with younger youths to ensure that TEEN Zone remains in capable hands.

The other main challenge was Ardenglen’s regeneration officers’ time and capacity. The officers’ time and resources have been directed towards other aspects of the regeneration workload that have a higher priority. If starting the project now we would source funding to provide TEEN Zone with a youth development worker to ensure that time and resources are in place to enable the successes continue.

32

4.2 Home Group – Human Library

Home Group believes that housing providers have a big role to play in tackling prejudice and discrimination, and have developed a Human Library to help deliver a range of involvement activities that do just that.

Human Libraries bring diverse groups of people together to share experiences and explore the ideas people have about different people with the simple aim of learning, understanding, breaking down stigma and challenging stereotypes. You may arrive at a Human Library event with one idea and leave with a totally different perspective!

Home Group’s Human Library is a large and diverse group of Home Group customers and colleagues who share their personal stories and experiences with others at meetings, workshops, training and events to help people understand the needs and experiences of different groups.

Home Group’s Human Library is like a collection of living books with each member telling their own unique story. The 70 members share their experiences of a diverse range of issues including:

Being transgender

Living with a child with autism

Being a visible Muslim woman

Coping with mental ill health in the workplace

Being a gay parent

Being an orthodox Jewish woman

Mental health and drug and alcohol recovery

Surviving domestic abuse

Their openness and willingness to answer questions enables participants to explore Human Library members’ lives, gain insight into different subjects and learn about diverse issues.

Human Library members delivered over 20 involvement activities in the last 12 months, reaching 721 colleagues, customers, stakeholders and contractors. Human Library activities at Home Group include:

Life swap - an interactive session that runs like speed dating! It gives colleagues and customers the opportunity to meet several Human Library members, ask awkward or difficult questions and see life through other people's eyes. Home Group has seen these sessions particularly benefit staff working in the Customer Service Centre, helping them to understand the diverse needs and experiences of the people whose voices they normally only hear at the end of the phone, and colleagues in office roles who may risk feeling detached from our front-line work. Life swap is a flexible session that can be delivered in30 minutes or a whole day. At Home Group, participants can attend in person or by Skype – connecting colleagues and customers from across the country.

33

Diversity Challenge - Members of the Human Library conduct equality analyses and help to identify gaps and potential inequality in service provision through diversity challenge groups. Targeted action as a result of these sessions has led to immediate changes at some services where issues were identified, including changes to staffing, support practices and communication. Home Group can consult with members both face to face and digitally through the digital Human Library.

Equality and diversity training - Human Library members deliver interactive equality and diversity training for Home Group customers, colleagues and contractors and bring training to life by sharing their personal stories and experiences.

Equality and diversity project groups – Human Library members are also involved at regional and national equality and diversity groups where they help to shape and deliver Home Group diversity action plans, and they are members of colleague networks such as Pride@Home and Partners in Pride (colleague lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender plus and allies networks).

34

4.3 Gentoo – Customer Engagement

In early 2018 Gentoo began a co-creation exercise with its’ customers looking at the engagement structures currently in place and improvements which could be made.

Gentoo recognised that it needed a better model/structure to ensure customers’ voices were heard more effectively within the governance structures and also that actively engaged customers heard the voices of senior leaders/Group Board.

Traditionally, in terms of customer engagement, there is a certain demographic who are more likely to be actively involved. These are more often older, often retired, customers. Likewise there are groups who are considered to be harder to reach; young people and those from BAME backgrounds in particular. Whilst it is true that Gentoo will never attract people representative of all of the communities it serves to participate in local community engagement opportunities, it can do more to gather the voices of all of our customers and in turn provide this information to the local actively engaged groups so they can champion all of the customer voices from their geographical areas.

Gentoo realised that it needed to provide those customers who are currently engaged in shaping services with the feedback from and experiences of those in the wider community so that they could effectively hear all of the voices from their local community and champion all of them in shaping service delivery.

Gentoo worked to create a new structure which gathers the voices from all of customers (not just those who can attend meetings) and is now disaggregating data/feedback in a number of ways. For example by geographical area – what are customers from X area saying? Are they more or less satisfied that customers from other areas? What does the age profile look like etc.

There are a range of ways in which Gentoo gathers customers voices.

35

Engagement – the range of customer groups and activities held to involve customers in shaping services and the range of activities/groups being facilitated by other organisations that Gentoo attend and participate in.

Customer Surveys – carried out with customers in their homes by neighbourhood staff, the surveys ask directly about a customers’ satisfaction and provide an opportunity for a customer to share their views on service provision. In addition Gentoo also carry out surveys with customers to whom support services are provided, including all young people supported through the STEPS outreach service.

Complaints – customer complaints, whether formal or through the Own It Fix It, and MP enquiries provide an opportunity to get an idea about the views of customers. Through the disaggregation of data Gentoo can establish the characteristics of those who are using different channels and the issues they are complaining about.

Satisfaction – through disaggregating the data and overlaying it with the customer profile information, Gentoo can identify which customers are most satisfied.

Social media/other feedback – by disaggregating existing data through other feedback mechanisms, including social media, in particular Facebook, Gentoo can hear what the voices of their customers are saying.

36

4.4 Grand Union Housing Group – Easy Read

Grand Union Housing Group (GUHG) has a strong people- focused culture, it provides 12,000 homes for more than 27,000 people across Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire and Hertfordshire. GUHG has a turnover of £73 million and employs more than 300 staff. GUHG provides high-quality, specialist housing services for adults with learning disabilities who need support.

In a desire to communicate more effectively with their customers with learning disabilities who need support, GUHG developed an approach to customer communication and engagement which aims to makes messages clear and easy to understand. GUHG have developed ‘Easy Read’ forms which they use with customers in their homes (Tenancy Agreement, budget plan, complaints forms, house rules created with the tenants and house meeting agenda) and others used at the Involve Partnership meetings (Terms of Reference, Agenda). GUHG has two Officers who have completed Makaton training that they use with some customers. Makaton is a language programme using signs and symbols to help people to communicate. It is designed to support spoken language and the signs and symbols are used with speech, in spoken word order. With Makaton, children and adults can communicate straight away using signs and symbols.

Figure 4.1 GUHG Easy Read Meeting Agenda (reduced size)

37

4.5 Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing and Olmec – Black on Board

Metropolitan Thames Valley (MTVH) is working in partnership with Olmec to deliver the Black on Board training programme to its staff and customers. The aim of the initiative is to encourage black and minority ethnic (BME) people to become Board Members. Metropolitan Thames Valley owns, manages or administers 57,000 homes across London, the South East, East Midlands and East of England. Olmec is a BME-led Social Enterprise which champions race equality through economic and social justice. Olmec works with a broad range of clients and partners to deliver innovative solutions that inspire and act as catalysts for social change.

Black on Board is a community board training programme for BME housing association staff and residents. It is designed to train and mentor candidates to take up board positions. The programme runs over 14 sessions, with two sessions per month for seven months. Sessions last six hours: running from 10.30 am to 4.30 pm. The programme includes support to identify and apply for Board positions. The focus within the BME community is people of colour – including Black, Asian, Latin American and Arabic communities – to address under-representation of those communities at Board level. Course content includes:

Role of the Board

Board recruitment and induction

Decision-making

Meeting conduct

Governing documents

Managing risk

Managing performance

Strategic and operational planning

Applying for positions

Legal obligations

Employing people

Managing finance

The content of the final two sessions is determined by the participants.

Metropolitan Thames Valley has committed to undertake two cohorts of 20 providing the training to a total of 40 participants. The current cohort is comprised of staff members across the different areas of service provision and levels of seniority up to heads of services. The second cohort will comprise a mix of staff members and customers. At the time of consultation four of the 14 sessions had taken place and one participant had secured an interview for a Board Member position. Olmec expects on average a 75% success rate in participants securing Board places. Costs of the programme are in the region of £25,000 to £30,000 for 20 participants.

38

“Olmec’s Black on Board project is tackling inequality at its roots by not only providing the required skill for disadvantaged people to compete but also bringing attention to the problem of unacceptably low (in some cases non-existent) representation of people of African descent and other minorities on HA Boards’’ Course Participant

“The course was hard, fun, dynamic, demanding, testing and what evolved was team work ... a team that identified itself not separately as pupils/tutors/facilitators but all three strengths working together and learning from each other. And the more we learnt, the more we realised, and the more we realised, the bigger the need we established to take control of social housing.” Course Participant

"The Black on Board programme has helped me develop my skills and confidence and provide the support I needed to work with a housing association Board. The particular area that I needed to develop was the jump from operational to strategic skills. Olmec has taken time to support me with this. I would recommend the programme to others" Course Participant

Claire Posaner, Executive Director of People at Metropolitan Thames Valley, said: ‘We are proud to have launched the Black on Board programme, working in partnership with Olmec. In the UK, people from BME backgrounds are significantly underrepresented at Board level – and Black on Board aims to play its part in redressing the balance. It is providing a great opportunity for our BME colleagues and customers to develop their skills, take on new challenges and change the way they work. Delegates on the course have already reported that they are approaching their roles differently and are keen to support and mentor colleagues in their teams. So the impact of the programme is far-reaching.’

For more information see: http://www.olmec-ec.org.uk/black-on-board/

39

4.6 NHS Foundation Trusts

NHS Foundation Trusts are not-for-profit, public benefit corporations. They are part of the NHS and provide over half of all NHS hospital, mental health and ambulance services. NHS Foundation Trusts were created to devolve decision making from central government to local organisations and communities. They provide and develop healthcare according to core NHS principles - free care, based on need and not ability to pay.

Foundation Trusts are not directed by government so have greater freedom to decide, with their governors and members, their own strategy and the way services are run. They can retain their surpluses and borrow to invest in services for patients and service users.5 NHS Foundation Trusts aim to deliver the Government’s commitment to devolution and decentralisation in the public services, and are at the heart of a patient-led NHS. They are not subject to direction from Whitehall. Instead, local managers and staff working with local people have the freedom to innovate and develop services tailored to the particular needs of their patients and local communities.

NHS Foundation Trusts are democratic. Local people and staff directly elect representatives to serve on the Board of Governors. The Board of Governors works with the Board of Directors – responsible for day-to-day running of the Trust – to ensure that the NHS Foundation Trust acts in a way that is consistent with its terms of authorisation. In this way, the Board of Governors plays a role in helping to set the overall direction of the organisation.

NHS Foundation Trusts strengthen local ownership of – and responsibility for – hospital and other health services. Major decisions are informed by active participation from members based in local communities. Residents and patients in areas served by an NHS Foundation Trust, with an interest in the wellbeing of their local hospital and health services, can register as members of the organisation.

Members are able to vote in elections to the Board of Governors of the NHS Foundation Trust. They can also stand for election as governors, and public members are eligible to be appointed as non-executive directors on the Board of Directors. The Board of Governors is responsible for representing the interests of the local community in the management and stewardship of the NHS Foundation Trust, and for sharing information about key decisions with other NHS Foundation Trust members. The Board of Governors is not responsible for the day to day management of the organisation e.g. setting budgets, staff pay and other operational matters – that is a matter for the Board of Directors. However, the Board of Governors allows localresidents, staff and key stakeholders to influence decisions about spending and thedevelopment of services. The Board of Governors also appoints the chair and non-executivedirectors of the Board of Directors.6

5 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-foundation-trust-directory/nhs-foundation-trust-directory#what-are-foundation-trusts6https://www.wwl.nhs.uk/Library/Foundation_Trust/Foundation_Trust_Guide.pdf

40

4.7 Parkhead Housing Association – Youth Conference

Parkhead Housing Association (PHA) was concerned about the older age profile of its’ Governing body and in response developed a number of initiatives to engage with young people.

Parkhead held an annual Youth Conference over a three year period. The events were advertised in local schools and youth projects, were after school hours. Parkhead Youth Projects staff worked with the PHA to organise and host the events. On average around 30 young people attended each youth conference.

Each year the conference had a different format including:

A play about an abusive relationship where the victim escaped by accessing supportedaccommodation

3 different speakers with young people visiting each speaker in small groups

Top table format with 2 minute presentations from speakers followed by a questionand answer session

At one event the young people said that the conference approach was good but recognised that real power lies with the Board and requested that a young person be co-opted on to the Board. PHA agreed and the young people decided who they wanted to nominate to the role (no elections were held). A 17 year old was co-opted to the Board and served for just over three years, leaving aged 21 when they started full time employment. PHA found the approach very successful and would consider co-opting a young person again in the future.

The engagement with young people has changed the level of interest in the Association and in recent years interest in Board Membership has increased with more nominees than Board places and elections being required. The age profile of the Board has changed with the youngest member being in their early 30’s and the rest being ‘middle aged’.

PHA continues its’ engagement with young people. ‘Parkhead’s Got Talent’ was very successful in bringing a lot of young people into contact with the Association for the first time. PHA is currently establishing a young person’s community hub in a renovated school building. Establishing the hub has shifted the focus and resources away from the youth conference but the new post of ‘Wider Role Officer’ will resume these activities. The Parkhead Youth project will also relocate to the hub providing ongoing opportunities to engage with young people.

41

4.8 Queens Cross Housing Association– Getting To Know You

Queens Cross Housing Association (QCHA) carried out two in depth customer profiling exercises called ‘Getting to Know You’ during 2012/13 and again in 2017. Information on customer’s needs and circumstances was gathered through postal surveys, telephone and face to face interviews. During 2017 a total of 2,346 returns were achieved accounting for 70% of all tenants. Overall QCHA received a very high response rate to the survey.

‘Getting to Know You 2’ was commissioned in order to provide accurate, up-to-date core demographic data about tenants and other household members. The 2017 survey questionnaire asked questions relating to:

Number of household members; Main tenant name, date of birth, gender identity,contact telephone number and email address, next of kin; Other household membersname, relationship to tenant, date of birth, gender identity

Whether English is the first language and preferred language for communication

Other communication needs, i.e. large print, sign language, etc.

Whether the tenant needs extra time to answer the door (e.g. due to mobility issues)

Internet access (where it is accessed, main online activities, the appetite to accessAssociation services online, reasons for not being online and any help required toaccess the internet)

Finance – access to bank account, membership of Credit Union, help required toaccess these

Fuel – how fuel bills are paid at present (power card, direct debit, receipt of bill),amount spent on fuel

Income – main source of income, economic status, weekly income, whether incomecovers household expenditure

Affordability - whether household has not put heating on/ eaten because they can’tafford it, if children have ever gone without items due to lack of affordability (shoes,food, etc.), whether the household requires assistance from the Association regardingaffordability

Equalities – marital status, ethnicity, religion

Health conditions and whether any household member is a wheelchair user

The findings have provided QCHA with invaluable information about protected characteristics and levels of poverty which have informed the Association’s Business Plan, strategic and operational decisions. For example QCHA finds the data particularly useful to support external funding bids. A Sharing Lives Sharing Spaces project has resulted in better engagement with the Chinese community heavily represented in one of their neighbourhoods. QCHA also established a ‘Community Chest’ which young people can apply to directly for funding of up to £150 – child poverty was a key finding of the survey and this money allows young people to enjoy life opportunities, activities and training that would not otherwise be available to them. . Overall the information has been used to drive improvement and deliver relevant services.

42

4.9 Raising Roofs – Preparing Tomorrow’s Leaders for the Board

The role of the programme is to develop and encourage young people from a diverse range of backgrounds to develop the required skills to become Board members and leaders in the housing sector.7

Theinitiative is a national programme aimed at getting young people on the Boards of Housing Associations and into leadership roles. Organisations put forward applicants that they have identified as potential future leaders in the sector and supports them in the process. The aims are to:

Develop the talent pool of future leaders

Encourage younger, diverse candidates to apply for board positions

Improve governance by making social landlords more forward and outward looking

The programme has been designed to give participants information and experience on being a board member. The programme is a combination of seminars over six core training days, mentoring sessions, peer support from other organisations and board meeting observation opportunities.

The programme has recently completed work with the first intake of learners and is about to begin the second. Several of those from the first intake are in the process of applying for positions on Housing Association Boards and one has been successful in securing an internal promotion to a leadership team.

There is a cost per participant for the core training days of around £3,500. Support and bursaries are available at around £1,000 to £1,500 per participant, which have been supported by the National Housing Federation, Winkworth Sherwood legal and JLL real estate services.

For more information see: http://raisingroofs.co.uk/

7 http://raisingroofs.co.uk/

43

4.10 South Yorkshire Housing Association - LeadWell

Reflecting the management practices identified by Jim Collins in his book ‘From Good to Great: Why some companies make the leap and others don’t’ South Yorkshire Housing Association’s (SYHA) leadership team wanted to understand how better to develop a pool of ‘home grown’ talent to ensure that future roles and opportunities within SYHA and on other, external, Boards would be filled by those with a high level of skills and experience and realise the potential of employees.

LeadWell8 is an internal, employee-led programme which provides opportunities to learn new skills and gain qualifications as an ‘Academist’. Each of around 10 Academists per year are matched with a mentor from SYHA’s senior management team to develop a learning and development programme to equip the mentee with knowledge, skills, qualifications and experiences to develop as a professional and as an individual. Once complete the academist graduates and becomes a LeadWell alumni, who then organise events for the follow years’ intake. The main events for the programme have involved high profile speakers such as former Home Secretary, David Blunkett; Alison Inman, CIH president; and David Orr, NHF Chief Executive. Following the end of the programme, alumni can progress to a leadership development programme, with further mentoring, a reading group and a customised development programme.

As part of this development programme, SYHA suggests other organisations with Boards that the academists and alumni may want to join. Several alumni have joined housing association and other Boards, particularly School Governors. Ninety per cent (90%) of Academists have secured a promotion or moved to other roles within the organisation and SYHA also now fill around 50% of all posts with internal applicants, although roles are advertised both internally and externally. The main ‘cost’ around the approach is the time of the mentors and mentees. Engaging with the programme is a corporate priority and so time is made available, reflecting this.

As well as the LeadWell programme, SYHA staff also participate in Peer Observation with five other housing associations. This involves visiting and observing the Board meetings of other Housing Associations and acting as a ‘critical friend’, providing feedback on positive and negative aspects of the papers, meeting or discussion and sharing experiences. SYHA are hosting a seminar in Spring 2019 for the participating organisations to be involved.

SYHA also employ ‘Red Team Thinking’ approaches in policy and strategy development. A Red Team is an independent group that challenges an organisation or other part of the organisation to improve its effectiveness by assuming an adversarial role or point of view. It is particularly effective in organisations or industries with strong cultures and fixed ways of approaching problem. At SYHA, the management team brief LeadWell academists to scrutinise practice, policy or strategy and feed their thoughts back to those who developed the draft policy/strategy.

8 https://www.syha.co.uk/who-we-are/leadwell/

44

4.11 Weslo – Board Member Remuneration

Set up in 1993, Weslo Housing Management (Weslo HM) is one of the leading providers of housing and property services in West Lothian and Falkirk districts. Weslo HM is a company limited by guarantee with charitable status, managing 2,348 properties for social rent. It is also the estate manager to over 3,500 private owners who have acquired their properties through Right to Buy.9

Weslo HM is governed by a Board of 12, headed by a non-Executive Chair. The Board is made up of 3 Executive Directors, who are charged with the day-to-day running of the business, and 9 non-Executive Directors, two of which are reserved spaces on the board for tenants.

Weslo HM is currently in the process of introducing Board Member remuneration. As Weslo HM is charitable it can pay less than half of its trustees. Three Executive Members – the Chief Executive, the Operations Director and the Finance Director – sit on the Board and by the nature of their role are remunerated. With 12 Board Members there is scope to pay a further two Board Members.

Weslo HM Board discussed the issue of Board Remuneration; this was then researched by the Executive Management Team including the commissioning of external advice, who prepared a paper for the Remuneration and Nominations Sub Committee to consider.

Weslo HM will introduce remuneration for the Chair of the Board and also for the Chair of the Remuneration and Nominations sub-committee at the start of the next financial year. Payment levels, identified in consultation with Campbell Tickell, will be circa £5,000 for the Chair and £2,250 for the Chair of the subcommittee. Weslo has been advised that remuneration will have to be through PAYE, but is currently taking further advice on this matter.

Weslo HM intends to remunerate these roles in order to recognise and compensate these office bearers for the time and commitment which is required to fulfil these roles. Weslo HM is clear that the move is not about attracting Board Members, nor about improving the quality of Board Members. Weslo HM notes that the time commitment has increased over the years and now includes several days completing Board Member appraisals, two strategy days and an away day in addition to the regular Board meetings. Introduction of the policy will not require any changes to the Board appraisal process, although it is recognised that the policy may alter Board dynamics.

Weslo HM indicated that the ‘bar has been raised’ by the new Regulatory framework and confirmed that discussions with the Regulator indicate that there should be no obstacles to the implementation of this policy.

9 https://www.weslo-housing.org/about-us/

45

4.12 Best Practice from the Literature

We also provide Best Practice examples drawn from the literature:

Extracted from the Irvine Housing Association Original Literature Review:

Board Portals: A board portal is a software application that is used to control various aspects of a boardroom meeting and handling boardroom tasks on a digital platform. Think of it like going from using a TV guide magazine to progressing to the TV planner on Sky. That transition was about more than just moving away from printed magazine for a better way to find the shows we want– we also got features such as recording, reminders, pause etc. The board portal is used on a number of devices such as tablet and mobiles so that it can be readily available at any time. It is a central point for the boardroom to find all the information they need for their boardroom meetings and a way for the administrators to easily distribute and manage the information, which could be boardroom documents, agendas or polls. Like the upgrade to the digital TV planner, by using a board portal it is more than just about just switching to paperless meetings – it is a tool that offers a selection of features that actually improves the boardroom’s governance practises.

46

Extracted from Succession Planning, Glasgow and West of Scotland Forum of Housing Associations, 2017

Spire View and Copperworks Housing Associations: As part of a recent review of succession planning for management committee members Spire View and Copperworks Housing Associations both adopted a new committee recruitment strategy. As well as looking at training needs for current committee members the strategy focused on identifying skills gaps on the committees, and on how to attract new members (either from within or out-with the community) to address these gaps. The Associations advertised for new committee members asking for anyone who was interested to get in touch for an informal chat. As a result Copperworks now has 3 new co-optee committee members (including a qualified chartered planner and a former housing professional) with the appropriate skills that the Association was seeking.

Spire View were not as successful this time around and plan to re-advertise for new committee members.

Extracted from Governance and Diversity in Housing: Why It Matters and Practical Steps To Increase Diversity, Housing Diversity Network, 2015

Golden Gates Housing Trust owns 8,600 homes in Warrington, making it the town’s largest provider of social housing. The Trust was previously an arms-length management organisation (ALMO), and was formed in 2010 with a stock transfer from Warrington Borough Council. The Trust took full advantage of this transition period by redesigning programmes and organisational structures. One aspect of this change programme was embedding equality and diversity throughout the organisation, including governance structures.

Prior to stock transfer the board was predominantly white, male, with an average age of over 50. The organisation was aware that this board demographic was not reflective of the Warrington community.

Golden Gates used demographic data on their tenants to gain a comprehensive understanding of what they wanted their board to look like. They then made deliberate efforts to promote their board vacancies to groups that were under-represented in governance structures. This included emailing and texting tenants directly to let them know about board positions reserved for tenants. They also advertised positions in the local housing press, local paper and on their website. The recruitment process was successful, with the resultant board reflecting the local community. The new composition of the board impacted on the priorities of the organisation.

Board away days in a social setting helped the new board members make connections with retained board members. The new board members were given board training, and all board members attended equality and diversity training facilitated by Golden Gates’ equality and diversity officer.

47

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

The operating environment for housing associations has become increasingly challenging overthe last ten years. This has increased the complexity of the decisions required and theassociated risks faced by governing bodies. This increasing complexity has been reflected inincreasing attention to the quality of governance, including the skills and competencies ofgoverning bodies, by the Scottish Housing Regulator.

These factors mean that housing associations face a challenge of succession planning andensuring that their governing bodies are renewed with individuals with the requisite skills andcompetence and their decisions are appropriately informed by people with a diverse range ofbackgrounds and experience.

5.1 Conclusions

5.1.1 Diversity and Inclusion

Diversity on a public Board is extremely important. Not only does it result in a more accurate representation of the general population and the tenants within a local area, but it also offers a number of other key benefits including:

Reputation: When a Board is diverse and representative of the tenants it serves, itbecomes more credible and can build a stronger reputation.

All voices are heard: When a Board is made up of members from the samebackground, gender, ethnicity or profession; it becomes difficult to see things fromalternative points of view. Ensuring that members come from a wide range ofbackgrounds helps a Board to hear the views of all members of that housing area.

Increased skills and expertise: Members who are recruited, for example, fromdifferent professional backgrounds, can bring new skillsets and expertise to the Board.

Organisational benefits: Evidence of internal organisational benefits are also clear asnumerous studies have found that diverse groups within an organisation such asmanagement teams perform better in comparison to more homogenous groups.

More productive: Unsurprisingly, Boards that are diversity are also more productive,with studies showing greater business results.

5.1.2 What Housing Boards Currently Look Like

A number of studies have sought to describe what a Public Board looks like and the type of people who become members. Across these studies the findings are remarkable similar. For the UK, two studies; one by the Housing Diversity Network published in 2015 which looks specifically at housing boards, and another published in 2017 which looks at charity trustees by the Charity Commission provide a good description of a typical board:

Demography of members: A typical housing board is chaired by a white British maleaged between 50 and 59 years. These characteristics are typical of the otherindividuals that sit on the board. The proportion of board chairs from black minority

48

ethnic backgrounds is 11%, while 2011 Census data reveals that the proportion of the U.K. population that do not identify as white British is 19.5%.

Professions represented: There is a lack of diversity in professional background andexperience with higher representation of members from financial sectors. The CharityCommission study also found that just under a quarter of trustees sit on more thanone charity board with an average of 1.35 boards per trustee.

Size: According to the Campbell Tickell 2017 study, on average Boards across thesector consists of 9 non-executive directors with one executive director and threecommittees.

5.1.3 Board Member Motivations

The literature finds that Board members are attracted to join through: a good organisational fit; values that are in line with the organisation and its mission; knowledge and skills that will benefit the board and the organisation; the ability to think strategically and good decision-making skills and forward thinking

Board Members were found to be highly compassionate, moderately interested in public policymaking (but understand politics and politicking), moderately willing to self-sacrifice, and highly committed to the public interest.

Board Members we interviewed mirror these findings as they were attracted to the role because:

It provided an opportunity shape the strategy of the organisation and have more inputon the course it takes

They felt that being on the governing body of a particular organisation would make areal impact and difference to their community

Skills and experience gained through governing body membership would enhancepersonal and career development

The main challenges in maintaining the role of Board Member related to difficulties in time and energy commitment. Managing the work load and time commitment was challenging, especially for those involved in other projects and in full time employment.

Our research highlights several perceived barriers to becoming a board member. Some of the participants felt that they were too young to be on the board and that this is a role taken up by older and more experienced professionals. Another barrier presented was the volume of responsibility that people had to undertake as a board member. Potential board members felt they would need to receive training and consistent skills development so that they could feel more comfortable to undertake the role. RSLs would also have to be clear about the expected time commitment and anticipated length of service as the expectations of our sample group may not match the requirements of the current board member role.

49

5.1.4 Routes to Change

It is widely acknowledged that diversity on a Board is very important, however there were differing ‘routes to change’ highlighted by the research. Some of these are:

Strong leadership: The importance of having a strong leader (typically a Chair) wasstressed through the literature. Effective leaders validate their authority by engaging,steering and supporting staff. Leaders should seek to lead the planning process,engaging and communicating with members, supporting the provision of training andmonitoring and reporting on progress. Several research studies advocated the use ofappointing a dedicated member to lead the equality and diversity strategy for theBoard.

Recruitment process: The recruitment process was seen as integral to recruiting (andretaining) a diverse Board. Recommended changes which would increase diversityincluded:

o Designing an engagement, outreach and development plan in order to attractpeople with the right skills and attributes

o Advertising positions in a variety of different places such as Twitter andFacebook and local community groups, flyers, recruitment days, using othernetworks as communication streams such as resident consultations and schoolevents.

o Assess personal specifications and ensure that people from a variety ofbackgrounds feel suitably qualified by giving at least equal weighting toalternative evidence that an individual could contribute to the mission of yourorganisation. If a Board is looking for specific requirements it should targetthose and explicitly mention them.

o Quotas and targets: Quota systems might be used in some cases to targetspecific groups. Norway introduced a gender quota system in 2003 to publicand private Boards, however it took over a decade to introduce 40% femalerepresentation.

o Stressing the rewards of membership: Research from the Charity Commissionfound that members are extremely positive about the role that they performas trustees, its importance to society and the personal reward and satisfactionthat they gain from being a charity trustee. It is worth promoting this aspect ofmembership in recruitment drives.

o Informal chats: The Housing Diversity Network encourage informalconversations with those who are thinking of applying. Under-representedgroups often feel that board membership is ‘not for them’. Part of the reasonfor this is the pervasive stereotype of board members being white, male,middle class and middle-aged. Informal conversations can help address thisissue.

Offering payments: From the research carried out by Campbell Tickell, it seems thatoffering financial incentives to become a Board Member does pay off. Of thosesurveyed in this study, 60% of respondents experienced a positive impact as a result ofthe introduction of payment. Positive impacts included; better quality of candidates,better skills, commitment, attendance and professionalism. The NHF study howeverhighlights several negative as well as positive impacts which should also be considered.

50

The position in Scotland in relation to charitable associations only being able to pay a portion of the board could also create further tensions, although increasing numbers of Scottish RSLs are now adopting this policy.

Offering non-financial benefits: Non-financial benefits in the form of training,mentoring, networking opportunities and social events were often cited as beinguseful tools to attract a greater range of people to join and retain membership.Specifically coaching and workshops on corporate governance; risk management; andthe role of the non-executive director as well as advice on updating and rewriting CVswere all mentioned. Advice on targeting a board appointment and access to mentoringand networking opportunities were also suggested.

Changing practical arrangements: Boards should consider how accessible they are,how frequently they meet, when they meet, could they use technology (e.g. Skype) toallow more people to attend and could they offer services such as creche facilities toenable childcare providers the chance to attend meetings.

Building a sense of purpose: Having a strong vision which is articulated clearly canhelp Board Members feel like they are part of something important. US researchshowed that Boards perform better when they have a strong sense of vision and whenthey operate as a collaborative team towards shared goals. Boards that reportedspending more social time together also reported having a stronger sense of sharedgoals.

Monitoring and evaluation: As with any strategy, programme or target, it is importantto regularly review and monitor progress what is doing well and what needsimproving. The Scottish Government provide a ‘toolkit’ of information for successionplanning which includes a SWOT analysis template and checklist. Boards should alsolook to consult with under-represented groups to identify barriers to entry. Equalityand diversity should also be discussed with current board members. Specialist equalityand diversity groups and organisations may be employed in order to evaluate currentpractices.

51

5.2 Recommendations

Recommendation 1: The good practice examples provided are all good illustrations of alternative approaches to improving equality and diversity within board membership or engaging customers more meaningfully to better understand their needs and shape services. The client RSLs may wish to adopt all or some of these approaches. Some such as the ‘Black on Board’ or ‘Leadwell’ approach may be suitable for adapting to local circumstances – if the RSLs require more young people or simply to create a well-informed pool of applicants for board membership this academy approach could be developed for any target group. Similarly if the individual RSLs do not have the capacity to deliver this alone a collective approach could be developed or delivered by representative bodies such as the SFHA or CIH.

Recommendation 2: RSLs should invite external speakers to discuss good practice with board members – the majority of our good practice case studies have indicated that they are willing to do this.

Recommendation 3: RSLs should audit their current membership in terms of: age, gender, ethnicity, etc. and length of service as an integral part of their board appraisal process. The findings should be compared against the customer base and the demography of their areas of operation.

Recommendation 4: Succession planning should be an integral part of the board appraisal process. The formality of the process should allow sensitive questions about how long each member anticipates they may serve for to be asked, response collated and an overall picture of likely duration of service to be established. Further analysis of the skills held by each board member and their likely retirement date can further enhance succession planning.

Recommendation 5: RSLs should critically review their current recruitment approach in line with the ‘Routes to Change’ highlighted above.

Recommendation 6: RSLs should develop an action plan for attracting and retaining a suitably diverse Board. Within this the board should consider the value of, ability to and overall pros and cons of board member remuneration.

Recommendation 7: RSLs should consider the appointment of a Board Diversity Champion to ensure that the issues of diversity and inclusion at Board level are highlighted and remain at the forefront of recruitment and succession planning.

52

APPENDIX 1 – LITERATURE SOURCES

53

Table A.1 sets out the key documents included in the Literature Review.

Figure A.1: Literature Review

Literature

Guidance on Succession Planning for Public Body Boards, Scottish Government, 2016

Regulatory Standards of Governance and Financial Management, Scottish Housing Regulator

Governing Body Succession Planning and Recruitment Guidance, SFHA, 2018

Board Appraisal: The Importance of Honest Conversations, National Housing Federation, 2018

Succession Planning, Glasgow and West of Scotland Forum of Housing Associations, 2017

Governance and Diversity in Housing: Why It Matters And Practical Steps To Increase Diversity, Housing Diversity Network, 2015

On Board: A Guide for Members of Statutory Boards, Scottish Government, 2017

Taken on Trust: The awareness and effectiveness of charity trustees in England and Wales, The Charity Commission, 2017

Leading with Intent, National Index of Non Profit Board Practices, Board Source, 2017

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plans: A Toolkit for Regularly Funded Organisations, Creative Scotland, 2016

Diversity Matters, One Minute Tips on Governance, Mike Hudson, 2014

Board Membership Motivations: A Research Project on Individual Motivations for Non-profit Board Membership, Miller-Stevens and Ward, Old Dominion University, 2013

Overcoming Barriers to Equality and Diversity Representation on Public, Private and Third Sector Boards in Scotland, Employment Research Institute, Napier University, 2014

Board Member Pay: What Housing Associations Need to Know, National Housing Federation, March 2014

Board Pay Findings, Campbell Tickell, 2018

Driving Diversity on Not-for-Profit Boards, Upston et Al, Engaging Young Leaders on Aged Care and Community Boards, 2017

When Boards Broaden Their Definition of Diversity, Women and People of Colour Lose Out, Harvard Business Review, October 2018

54

APPENDIX 2 –BOARD MEMBER MOTIVATIONS METHODOLOGY

55

Methodology

A Snowball sampling approach, also known as chain-referral sampling was used. This is a non-probability (non-random) sampling method which involves research participants nominating other potential participants. Referrals from existing participants were used to generate new subjects. In order to avoid a lack of objectivity that can occur with chain-referral sampling, we used different primary sources, so the results would be as objective and varied as possible. We sampled a range of people from different professional backgrounds in order to get a spread of opinions. We found new subjects from existing subject’s networks.

We interviewed 20 people in total. Half of the participants were currently serving as board members in third sector organisations and the housing sector or had served in the recent past. The other half of the participants were young people with the skillsets to undertake a board member position i.e. property workers, architects, health and safety auditors, homelessness officers, social policy & social sciences graduates and post graduates, and finance graduates.

The Sample

Board Members

We interviewed ten people who currently serve or have served in the past on a governing body of a third sector organisation or housing association. We conducted five interviews in person and the other five via telephone. Seven identified as female, two as male and one preferred not to state their gender. Participants were aged between 30 and 46 years old. They had a range of experience on a governing body, from those who had served for a few years to those who had just recently joined. All based in Scotland but two of them were board members for charities based in England.

The board members who participated were serving in third sector and housing organisations such as:

Welfare rights advocacy (3 out of 10 participants)

A charity run community events hub (2 participants)

A charity supporting film production for women of colour (2 participants)

A charity that provides support for BME women (1 participant)

A support and advocacy charity for people that have been affected by mental healthissues (1 out of 10 participants

An arms-length management organisation (1 out of 10 participants).

Non-Board Members

We also interviewed ten people who do not currently serve as voluntary Board Members in order to explore potential motivations and barriers to participation. We conducted five interviews in person, three on the phone and two via Skype. Five of the participants identified as female, four as male and one as non-conforming. Participants were between the ages of 23 and 44. Most were aged 18-30. The majority (9 out of 10 participants) were based in different cities in Scotland (Glasgow, Edinburgh, Fife) and one was based in the Midlands..

56

The non-board members who participated had a range of experience and expertise. We interviewed people at various career stages including those who were undergraduate students, PhD students, and professionals with 20 years experience. The participants had various fields of specialism such as: policy and parliamentary affairs; finance; architecture; social policy human rights and international law; modern languages and business; social work; and health and safety. They also had a range of experience working in sectors such as: homelessness, housing policy, social policy, management, housing property, media research, sexual violence and social services.

The G8 is a group of Scottish RSLs that are of a similar scale and who share similar values and an ethos of combining a business approach with achieving positive outcomes for customers and communities. Established in 2003 the group shares best practice, benchmarks operational performance and carry out related initiatives.