Social Value in Practice 2021022765, 2021022766, 9780367457167, 9780367457150, 9781003024910

Citation preview

Social Value in Practice

Social Value in Practice offers the reader a simple, accessible guide for considering, creating, and delivering social value in projects and within their organisation. The book connects social value to the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and presents an insight into the many and different practical ways in which individuals and organisations can make a positive impact towards resolving the ‘people, planet and prosperity’ agenda: • • • • • • • •

‘Good work’ – good practice in managing people, including working conditions, and equality, diversity, and inclusion Education, skills, and employment, including apprenticeships and enhancing the industry image Social procurement and circular supply chains Strategic partnerships and social enterprises Community development, regeneration, and placemaking Construction consultancy Architecture, design, and construction Assessing and measuring social value.

Reflective practitioners can pick it up, turn to a chapter, and learn something they can use right away. Through numerous practical examples and think pieces, this book can help readers learn how to create social value, how to improve and build upon current practice, and how to co-create social value in partnership with clients and the supply chain. The authors aim to empower and inspire stakeholders to engage with new ideas and create more value for those using the built environment. This book is a must read for all those involved in procuring, tendering, planning, designing, developing, funding, building, working in, and managing the built environment. Ani Raiden is a Senior Lecturer in HRM at Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, with a well-established research track record. Ani is a certified Carbon Literacy Trainer, and the principles of sustainability are integral to her research on managing people, quality of working

life, social value, and construction and project management. In 2009 Ani co-authored a book on people resourcing with Professors Andy Dainty and Richard Neale, and in 2019 she published a first of its kind text on social value with Martin Loosemore, Andrew King, and Chris Gorse: Social Value in Construction, Routledge. Andrew King runs Soul Value (https://www.soulvalue.co.uk/), a built environment consultancy that helps clients simply and effectively get to grips with social value. He has been involved in construction from a young age, having gained experience working in the family construction business before working as a Quantity Surveyor, running his own surveying business and helping develop a relationship-based supply chain strategy for one of the UK’s largest contractors. His research, lecturing, and writing increasingly focuses on social value and apprenticeships and he is a Workplace Tutor for Quantity Surveying Degree Apprenticeship students at Nottingham Trent University.

‘It has long been said that the built environment underpins the fabric of society globally. Delivering social value in practice is thus a critical step. This book offers a promising guide for professionals on how to deal with the conundrums of delivering social value in practice.’ —Paul W Chan, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands

Social Value in the Built Environment Series Editors: Ani Raiden and Martin Loosemore

Social Value in Construction Ani Raiden, Martin Loosemore, Christopher Gorse and Andrew King Social Value in Practice Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Social Value in Practice

Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Cover image: Designed by Andrew King First published 2022 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2022 Ani Raiden and Andrew King The right of Ani Raiden and Andrew King to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Raidén, Ani, author. | King, Andrew, 1968 September 15– author. Title: Social value in practice / Ani Raiden and Andrew King. Description: New York, NY: Routledge, 2022. | Series: Social value in the built environment | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2021022765 (print) | LCCN 2021022766 (ebook) | ISBN 9780367457167 (hardback) | ISBN 9780367457150 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003024910 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Social values. | Sustainable development—Social aspects. Classification: LCC HM681 .R35 2022 (print) | LCC HM681 (ebook) | DDC 306—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021022765 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021022766 ISBN: 978-0-367-45716-7 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-367-45715-0 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-003-02491-0 (ebk) DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910 Typeset in Times New Roman by codeMantra

Contents

List of figures List of tables Foreword by Sir John Peace An introduction from the Series Editors About the authors Acknowledgements

xiv xvii xix xxi xxii xxix

SECTION I

Social value: the opportunity 1 Introduction

1 3

A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Social value 3 Polarisation of practice: measuring added value vis-à-vis value-based business 4 Call for action: the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 6 What does this book offer? 12 Chapter summary 12 References 13 2 Social value: the drivers, challenges, and opportunities A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

The context: growing construction market, workforce composition, skills and labour shortages, environmental challenges, and community engagement 14 What is ‘social value’? 18 Defining social value 18 Doing social value 22

14

viii

Contents Drivers for social value 23 Social value orientation 24 Ethics 27 Legislation and the regulatory frameworks 27 The business case 27 Differences between organisations, professions, and interpretations of value 28 Assessing and measuring social value 30 Measuring versus doing social value 30 Challenges related to the processes of assessing and measuring social value 31 The economics and politics of social value 33 Bureaucracy 34 Chapter summary 35 References 35

SECTION II

Co-creating social value 3 Stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders

39 41

A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Stakeholder theory 41 Identify stakeholders 42 Categorise the stakeholders 45 Stakeholder matrix 47 Stakeholder mapping 48 Maintaining and managing the relationship, and continuous review and evaluation 48 Chapter summary 51 References 52 4 Managing people and considering, creating, and delivering social value A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Senior management support and leadership 54 Contracts of employment and contracts for services: employees, workers, and the self-employed 55 Conditions of employment 58 Managing equality, diversity, and inclusion 61 Equality of opportunity – the legal case 61 Managing diversity and inclusion – the business case 63

53

Contents  ix Positive action and affirmative action 64 Intersectionality 69 Chapter summary 70 References 71 5 Degree apprenticeships

72

A N DR E W K I NG A N D A N I R A I DE N

Background 73 Chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship 74 Employer-mentors: central to apprentices’ development 77 RICS Assessment of Professional Competence 80 Structured development programmes 80 RICS Counsellor 84 RICS Supervisor 85 Inspiring non-chartered mentors 86 Off-the-job training 88 Apprentice experience 89 ‘Dangled in the deep end?’ 89 Digital leaders 92 Motivated performers 93 Earn whilst you learn 94 Family and friends careers advice 95 An opportunity to develop skills, attract new entrants, create competitive advantage and social value, and connect with the SDGs 96 Equality, diversity, and inclusion 99 Chapter summary 104 References 105 6 Social value in procurement

107

A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Social procurement 108 JA Building Services Ltd 110 Social enterprises and social businesses 111 Chapter summary 114 References 114 7 Circular economy: delivering social value throughout the supply chain E M M A N U E L M A N U, N I I A N K R A H , A N D JA M I L A BE N T R A R

Circular economy 116 Circular supply chain 117

115

x Contents Circular vision and social value 117 Circular strategies: reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery 119 Circular business models 119 Circular design model 120 Circular construction model 122 Product as a service model 123 Sharing platforms model 123 Life cycle extension model – repurpose, refurbish, and maintenance 124 End-of-life management model 124 Circular material production and supply model 125 Energy recovery model 125 Circular vision for a construction supply chain 126 AR Demolition and Aggregate Recycling, UK 127 Thermal Recycling, UK 129 Upcyclea, France 130 Chapter summary 132 References 133 8 A strategic social value framework – a consultancy perspective

135

K E V I N O SB ON

Focus Consultants 136 Public sector frameworks 137 Focus Consultants’ social value framework 139 Fundraising 141 Volunteering 141 Employment support 142 Knowledge transfer and mentoring 142 The environment 143 Measuring social value 145 Chapter summary 148 References 148 9 A client perspective on creating and delivering social value M I R A N DA PL OW DE N , A N I R A I DE N , A N D A N DR E W K I NG

South Yorkshire Housing Association 151 Rockingham Street – a workspace for a social housing business 152 Slingsby Place – a new social housing scheme 157

150

Contents  xi Southey Owlerton Neighbourhood Strategies – community-led regeneration plans 159 Alt-Erlaa housing estate in Vienna, Austria 165 Chapter summary 168 References 168 10 A contractor’s perspective on social value

170

JA M E S W I L L C OX , A N DR E W K I NG A N D A N I R A I DE N

Key learning points 171 1.  Social value is integral to the company mission, vision, strategy, and business model – not simply ‘added value’ 172 2.  Measuring social value is popular but very challenging 172 3.  Partnerships are central to social value 173 Social value journey 173 The Foundation 173 Training and skills development 176 Community work 178 Work with partner organisations and the Government 178 Covenants 179 Social Value Accounts and Social Return on Investment (SROI) 180 Strategy and awards 183 Social value priorities 184 Shared values with clients and the supply chain 186 Measuring social value 187 Chapter summary 189 References 189 SECTION III

Placemaking: participative and collaborative design, architecture, and planning

191

11 Co-designing collaborative economies in design and placemaking

193

S OPH I A DE S OUSA

Leaders and enablers: local authorities and clients 195 The developer as a champion for quality and social value 197 Community collaborators and leaders 198 Examples of replicable co-design approaches from Glass-House Community Led Design practice 199

xii Contents Cross-sector ideas generation and co-designing local initiatives: Reconfiguring Place, a Glass-House WEdesign event series 199 Laying the foundations for a collaborative economy: cross-pollination workshops 202 Incubating civic leadership through cross-pollination 206 Using co-design to explore global placemaking challenges 207 Social value and community heritage – Andrew Langley 210 Chapter summary 212 References 213 12 Architecture and social value: praxis, strategy, and tactics

214

SI MON K AY- JON E S A N D L E E I V E T T

Reflective praxis, procurement, and systemic considerations for social value 215 The ordinary, legislation, and championing social value 215 Thinking and working strategically in architecture for creating social value 219 Institute for Bio-Economy, Finland 220 Preston – our heritage in 2032, UK 224 Acting and choosing tactically in architecture to deliver social value 227 LoveMilton, Colston Milton, UK 228 The Portland Inn – raising the roof, Stoke-on-Trent, UK 229 Chapter summary 234 References 234 13 Delivering social value through planning – local authority as a leader and enabler L AU R A A LVA R E Z

Social value of place in planning 237 The capacity of the planning system  240 Design quality as a framework to deliver social value 241 Process audit and an ambition to become carbon neutral 242 Engagement process 244 Use of social eating as a tool to deliver social value through planning – Marsha Smith 247 Lessons learnt: the challenges and main gains of the journey to open, democratic, and continuous community engagement 249 Chapter summary 255 References 255

236

Contents xiii SECTION IV

Assessing and measuring social value

257

14 Principles and good practice in assessing and measuring social value

259

A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Principles of social value 260 Doing the right thing: a mixed-methods approach to assessing and measuring social value 261 Measuring social value using accounting principles 267 Chapter summary 275 References 275 15 Selected tools for assessing and measuring social value

277

A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Social Value Maturity Framework 278 What you build 279 How you build 280 How you operate 281 CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative 281 Human Impact and Profit Scorecard (HIP) 283 Social Impact Assessment (SIA) 283 Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) 285 Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) 287 Social Return on Investment (SROI) 288 TOMs Framework 290 Chapter summary 293 References 293 16 Conclusion

295

A N I R A I DE N A N D A N DR E W K I NG

Index

297

Figures















Figures  xv



















xvi Figures







Tables











xviii Tables







Foreword

The ongoing pandemic has changed life as we know it across the planet. As the virus and its impact continue to spread globally, wealth inequality is accelerating and leading to an ever-greater divide between those who have, and those who have not. Whilst some industries have been placed in deep sleep, with their workers furloughed, others have undergone huge transformations fuelled by the adoption of new technology and working practices. Whilst the rate and nature of change is unprecedented, the need for change is long overdue. Globalisation has undoubtedly led to many benefits, not least of which is a more connected world, but the drive for efficiency, often predicated on lowest cost, has contributed to our now severe environmental problems and lack of resilience in supply chains. The need to rethink our approach is clear and the pandemic offers us a way to do things differently. This book explores how we can do this through focusing on social value. It connects stakeholders’ stories from the Midlands in the UK to an international network of examples and includes the following perspectives on the built environment: • • • • • • •

Construction clients Developer Designers and Architects Urban planner Consultants National and local contractors University and Professional Body.

The clear examples of social value practice provide a way for the built environment community to create a positive impact. It is clear that right now, as the world seeks to recover from the pandemic that has left us reeling, we also have a real opportunity. We can and must build back better, stronger, and greener, ensuring that consideration of and responsibility for the wider economic, social, and environmental impact of our actions are at the heart of everything we do. This is something that, as the Chairman of the Midlands Engine, I am working to embed across our

xx Foreword region as we work in partnership to secure the sustainable economic health of our communities, businesses, and places. Importantly, this book showcases the transformative impact of social value as a way to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. As such, it goes beyond the vogue for soundbites by instead calling people to action on social value and recognising the crucial role they play in creating positive change. Sir John Peace, Midlands Engine Chairman

An introduction from the Series Editors

We are pleased to introduce the second book in the Routledge Social Value in the Built Environment book series: Social Value in Practice. This book builds on our first text, Social Value in Construction, where we set out the principles and conceptual foundations for this emerging concept. We presented the legal and moral arguments for social value, and discussed assessing and measuring social value, the most contested and hotly debated aspect in the field. The final lines in our conclusion highlighted a critically important point – the process of assessing social impact should not be an end to itself but a means to target strategy and change behaviours amongst stakeholders that can maximise positive outcomes for the communities in which we build. Social Value in Practice offers a critical springboard for action to consider, create, and deliver social value in the built environment, and to connect social value activity to the global Sustainable Development Goals agenda. This book showcases examples of good practice in social value from different perspectives, including clients, designers and architects, a city planner, a consultant, and contractors, and so demonstrates how we can collectively tackle pressing grand challenges. In future volumes in the Routledge Social Value in the Built Environment series, we look forward to contributions which focus specifically on consumer issues, materials use, design, community involvement and development, urban planning, environmental management practices, human rights, procurement, social enterprises, managing people and labour practices, organisational governance, and fair business practices, to name but a few important topics in this space. The series will address questions of both theory and practice, and it will be broad in scope, reporting new empirical work, ground-breaking approaches, and exposing good and bad practice through real-life case studies. We welcome proposals from thought-leaders and researchers who are interested in social value in all areas relating to the built environment, and we encourage cross-disciplinary co-authorship from researchers, policy makers, and practitioners from around the world. We hope this volume will inspire prospective authors and editors to submit manuscript proposals to the series about their current research and project interests. Ani Raiden and Martin Loosemore

About the authors

Dr Ani Raiden, Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, UK Ani Raiden is a Senior Lecturer at Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University. She is a Chartered Member of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) and a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA). Ani is a certified Carbon Literacy Trainer, and the principles of sustainability are integral to her research on managing people, quality of working life, and social value. Ani studied for her PhD at the Department of Civil and Building Engineering at Loughborough University in the UK developing a Strategic Employee Resourcing Framework for construction organisations. This bridged her academic interests and experience in the industry. As a Human Resource Transformation Executive (Diversity) at Eircom, an Irish communications company, Ani specialised in equal opportunities and managing diversity before embarking on an academic career. At the time of publication, she is a co-investigator on a CITB funded ‘Innovation Driven Procurement’ research project. Ani has convened and delivered several social value themed seminars and workshops. In 2020, Ani was invited to deliver a topical ‘Social value, common good, and Covid-19’ keynote at the 36th annual ARCOM conference. She is a co-editor of the Routledge Social Value in the Built Environment book series, co-author of Social Value in Construction (ISBN: 9780415371636), Employee Resourcing in the Construction Industry (ISBN: 9781138295094) and many papers on social value, work-life balance, well-being, health and safety, knowledge management, human resource management, and human resource development in construction. Dr Andrew King,  Soul Value and School of Architecture, Design and Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, UK Andrew King runs Soul Value, a built environment consultancy that helps clients get to grips with social value by creating simple and effective solutions. He has been involved in the built environment sector from a young age, having first gained experience working on site in the family

About the authors  xxiii construction business, Brian King Builders. He went on to run his own surveying business, practise as a quantity surveyor, and play a central role developing a relationship-based nationwide supply chain strategy for one of the UK’s largest contractors, now Morgan Sindall. His current interest in social value, apprenticeships, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals is a progression of his earlier work highlighting the importance of transitioning client value throughout the supply chain, itself the focus of his PhD. Andrew is a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and his procurement, supply chain management, and social value work is published in a range of books and papers. The Chartered Institute of Building recognised his involvement in an Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council project to improve tender evaluation in design and build projects by jointly awarding him the Premier Research and Innovation Award. His time as a Senior Lecturer in the School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment at Nottingham Trent University saw him collaborate with a wide range of industry practitioners and encourage students to be curious, create positive change, and above all, serve society throughout their careers. More recently, he helped start, and then develop, the Workplace Tutor role for quantity surveying degree apprenticeship students at Nottingham Trent University, as well as helping organisations improve their apprenticeship schemes. Dr Laura Alvarez, Nottingham City Council, UK Laura B. Alvarez is the East Midlands Convenor for the Urban Design Group and was amongst the first recognised urban design practitioners in the UK. At the time of this publication, she was a Senior Principal Urban Design and Conservation Officer at Nottingham City Council leading the development of the Design Quality Framework for the City, which includes the Co-PLACE programme for democratic placemaking. Laura is also a qualified Community Organiser and has worked closely with local groups and residents designing innovative ways of bottom-up engagement and co-design and contributing with the development of several Neighbourhood Plans. She had an active role in launching and co-running Nottingham’s Urban Room where she acts as Lead Curator and trustee. Her PhD research at the University of Nottingham focused on applicable theory on socially sustainable urban design in neighbourhoods. She looked at how urban morphology, social networks, and place psychologies contribute to healthier, happier lifestyles. After four years working in higher education, she is now a guest lecturer at several universities. Laura’s 20 years of work in architectural and urban practice include consultancy for the award-winning Trent Basin scheme in Nottingham and New Lubbesthorpe in Blaby. She also assists local and regional authorities and provides urban design and master planning training to house builders, supporting Redrow Homes in the development of their Placemaking Guide. Laura is a local host for the Place Alliance and sits

xxiv  About the authors at the Design: Midlands and South West Review Panels. She is a published critic, and radio and TV commentator. Her work includes contributions towards the Design Companion for Planning and Placemaking, BBC broadcasting and the Telegraph news. Dr Nii Ankrah, Aston University, UK Nii A. Ankrah  is a Senior Lecturer and Director of construction programmes at the Department of Civil Engineering, Aston University. He is a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and has over 13 years of research experience in organisational behaviour and project management. He is well published in the areas of health and safety, supply chain management, dispute resolution, cradle to cradle in the built environment, and sustainability, with 57 refereed publications comprising journal papers, books, and conference papers. Jamila Bentrar, Métropole Européènne de Lille, France Jamila Bentrar is an Urban Project Manager and a futurist in Lille Metropole (Urban Authority in North of France). She has a master’s degree in Environmental Geosciences and undertakes project management of various development activities, such as natural risk management and brownfield rehabilitation. Her interests are in foresight, innovation, and circular models. In the exercise of her profession, she participates in many innovative projects aimed at the development of demonstrators to preserve and valorise the territory’s resources. Sophia de Sousa, The Glass-House Community Led Design, UK Sophia joined The Glass-House Community Led Design, UK, as Chief Executive in 2005. She is an impassioned champion of design quality and enabler of design practices that empower people and organisations and that help communities thrive. She is also a leader in the field of research on community-led, participatory and co-design practices and is a visiting fellow at the Open University. Sophia plays an active role in designing and delivering hands-on training and support to communities and practitioners, and in co-designing research, innovation, and resources. She is also an active spokesperson and expert advisor, contributing regularly to events and to panels and advisory groups, including the High Streets Task Force; the  Historic England Historic  Places Panel; the Highways England Design Review Panel; Design Council Built Environment Experts; and the Historic England Expert Advisory Group. Sophia’s background is in architecture and urbanism, education, voluntary sector work, and multiculturalism. She is passionate about finding opportunity in complexity and diversity and committed to working collaboratively to finding informed and creative solutions. Sophia is fascinated by the connection between design, people, and place, and believes that our sensory and emotional connections with the places around us shape how we live, and who we are. 

About the authors  xxv Lee Ivett, Baxendale and UCLAN, UK Lee Ivett  is an award-winning architect, designer, artist, and urbanist with a track record of developing transformational long-term projects with third sector organisations. He is the founder of Baxendale Studio whose mode of practice is intensely generative, developing low-budget socially focused projects from scratch largely for marginalized communities within Scotland and beyond as a means of identifying ideas and developing local agency and capacity. Baxendale Studio works with artists, makers, dancers, choreographers, growers, academics, musicians, communities, and other stakeholders to prototype and generate activity that ultimately creates a demand for the physical, social, cultural, and economic regeneration of place. Lee has been recognized internationally for the impact and quality of his work, exhibiting, producing, and presenting work in Poland, Hungary, Nuremburg, Los Angeles, Ljubljana, and most significantly at the 2018 Venice Architecture Biennale. He was also selected for inclusion in New Architects 3 – the definitive survey of the best British architects to have set up practice between 2005 and 2015. Lee is a regular commentator and contributor within the international architecture and design media, with his work and writing published extensively, including in the Architectural Review, the Architects Journal, RIBA Journal, and Architecture Today. Lee combines and embeds practice and research with his role of BSc (Hons) Architecture Course Leader at the University of Central Lancashire, where he also leads the final year design studio. Simon Kay-Jones, Studio Loafalo Oy, Finland and UK Simon Kay-Jones is a practising architect in the UK and Finland with his Studio, Loafalo Oy, which concentrates on architectural projects that specialise in environmental sustainability, Zero Carbon and Passive design, together with new material applications for positive environments, people, and spaces in the Bio Economy. He has led BREEAM Excellent or Outstanding multimillion-pound projects for schools, offices, homes, and education facilities, while also winning sustainability awards in design and construction. He was recently the project architect and master planner on the new Bio Campus in Central Finland, and lead architect for the ATTE EU funded project for interior design of Future Positive learning environments. Simon is also the Course Leader for Architectural Studies in Hong Kong for the University of Central Lancashire. A Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA), Registered Architect with the Architects Registration Board (ARB), and Member of the Finnish Institute for Architects (SAFA), Simon is a Lecturer at the University of Tampere, Finland, and research manager where he leads the Build for Climate initiative facilitating the industry transition to a zero embodied carbon construction in Europe. Simon’s research spans across architectural education, drawing and pedagogy, and material and spatial

xxvi  About the authors assemblage in design. At present, Simon is a doctoral student at the University of Tampere, Finland, researching how the material world energises spatial experiences through framing matter. Simon’s background in sustainable design and innovation, together with his teaching, continues to influence and direct his research interests, where he is focused on the interplay between materials, spaces, and experiences for social good. Andrew J. Langley, School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, UK Andrew is a PhD Candidate and Associate Lecturer at the School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University. He has previously been a visiting studio tutor at both the University of Nicosia and The Namibia University of Science and Technology. As well as experience within architectural practices, Andrew has led on a variety of community engagement projects, uncovering the needs of, and inspiring, various disenfranchised and marginalised groups. His most recent commission uses participatory arts to research and understand systemic and lifeworld barriers as experienced by Black, Asian, and ethnic minorities. Andrew has led on a Nottingham City Council community heritage project, which took advantage of his deep knowledge of ethnic minorities, social justice, and architecture. The amalgamation of these themes is also evident within his PhD project, which develops a participatory methodology to unveiling community values within the built environment. Dr Emmanuel Manu, School of Architecture, Design and Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University, UK Emmanuel Manu is an Associate Professor in Quantity Surveying and Project Management at the School of Architecture, Design, and the Built Environment, Nottingham Trent University. He is a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and a Member of the Association for Project Management (APM). He has over eight years’ experience undertaking research activities in the areas of construction supply chain management, circular economy in the built environment, sustainable procurement and social value, and smart and digital processes for performance improvement in the built environment. He has collaborated with industry partners to deliver research and consultancy projects aimed at improving the performance of construction supply chains and driving the transition towards a smart and circular built environment. Kevin Osbon, Construction Consultant and Investor Kevin Osbon is Founder Partner of a multi-disciplinary construction practice, Focus Consultants LLP, Director of environmental specialists MES Building Services, Director of property development and investment company MOS Incorporated, and a Senior Lecturer at Nottingham Trent University. Kevin has a unique perspective on the construction

About the authors  xxvii industry having worked in a diverse range of roles, including starting as a yard hand at a builder’s merchant, labouring on site, working for a commercial window sub-contractor, becoming a site engineer, then subagent and site manager for a number of large construction companies. He eventually transitioned into consultancy after working as a mainstream Project Manager. In 1994 he set up Focus Consultants and over the last 25 years he has grown and developed the Chartered Surveying practice into a £5m annual fee turnover organisation. They now provide economic development, project management, building surveying, quantity surveying, and environmental surveying consultancy services. Focus Consultants creates, manages, and delivers approximately £300 million of construction projects per year, and since its inception has raised more than £1 billion of public funds for clients towards their programmes and projects. Kevin’s first degree is in Construction Management, he holds a master’s degree in Project Management, and he is currently undertaking a Doctorate with Nottingham Trent University, which draws on Focus Consultants experiences of working with social value. He is a Member of the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) and Institute of Economic Development (IOD). His specialist interest is in project creation and initiation and he has published work on ‘the Changing Role of the Quantity Surveyor’ as well as contributing to development of the Construction Management Forum Report with Reading University. Miranda Plowden, South Yorkshire Housing Association, UK Miranda Plowden  has over 30 years’ experience across all aspects of regeneration, housing, and neighbourhood renewal in consultancy, in the third sector, in government agencies and local government. A landscape architect and urban designer by training, with experience of front-line community regeneration and in a range of leadership roles, her focus is on placemaking and housing growth that creates opportunities for local people. Co-production, participatory arts, and sustainability are key features of her practice. She has been Business Development Director at South Yorkshire Housing Association since 2013 where she is responsible for strategic oversight of their portfolio of 6,000 homes, building new homes, their commercial subsidiary and brand, marketing and communications. She is exploring how to deliver more new and affordable homes across Sheffield City Region, including through offsite construction, how housing can be part of the solution to the challenges facing the UK’s health and social care system, and how design quality and the arts can make homes, and services can be made more joyful. Marsha Smith, Faculty of Business and Law, Coventry University, UK Marsha Smith  is a PhD Candidate at Coventry University Business School, a Visiting Fellow at Nottingham Trent University, an academic advisor to The National Food Service and the FoodHall Project, and

xxviii  About the authors contributes to a number of strategic panels on food insecurity, food wastage and social cohesion. Marsha gained ten years’ experience in award-winning community food initiatives before returning to academia to undertake research into the value of social eating initiatives. She has authored a range of publications in The Sociological Review and The Conversation and has submitted written evidence to a House of Lords Select Committee. James Willcox, Built Environment Sustainability, UK James Willcox  spent just over six years at Willmott Dixon as Head of Sustainability in the Midlands, where he oversaw the organisation’s approach to Sustainable Development, Social Value and Environmental Compliance, before leaving at the end of 2020 to pursue work as an independent consultant. During this time, James also served as a non-executive board member for Sustainability West Midlands, a not-for-profit company that works with its members in the business, public and voluntary sectors to champion sustainability across the area. From a design background, with a master’s degree in Building Energy and Sustainable Design, his roles in sustainability have led him to working in and around social value for multiple tier 1 contractors and across many national and regional construction frameworks. It was from this that he was able to experience first-hand delivery of social value in a commercial environment, including early adoption of the National TOMs within Willmott Dixon, whose Midlands business would continue to be one of the groups strongest performing within social value for the duration of his time there.

Acknowledgements

This book has been a joint effort. Many conversations have been had, words written, and feedback given and received, to get to this point. We truly thank all our valuable contributors – you have risen to the challenge with aplomb! We did not know what was in store for us when we entered into this endeavour, back in late 2019. Writing in a pandemic has been both a blessing and, at times, something of a challenge. Most people have had to deal with similar lockdown impacts – juggling work and other responsibilities such as childcare, an inability to meet others in person, and the uncertainty about what the future holds. For some, things have sadly been much worse. We look to the future with this work. These strange days have offered us the opportunity to step back, lift the veil, and see more clearly what we have become, and where we are heading. How could we fail to be inspired to write this work, when people all around us have been talking about the importance of coming together for the common good? People standing up to injustice, telling their stories with courage. People caring about their neighbours. Or seeing first-hand the joyful evidence of nature rebounding when we get out of its way, and indeed then seeing it suffer once more when we return. We have been drawn into conversations with people whose previously busy lives kept them occupied, and who instead have benefitted from having the time to reflect and consider what is truly valuable. The same people have wanted to talk about the importance of paying essential workers fairly, treating them with respect, and helping those in society who need it. We don’t pretend that things have been all rosy, far from it, but these examples represent an awakening. Put simply, people have recognised that we cannot carry on living as we are, and that we need to radically change if we are to stop a global meltdown. These conversations generally lead to an agreement that we need to disrupt the status quo. Now. Central to our work has been the overwhelming recognition that the built environment is of central importance to our lives and that fairness, equality, diversity, and inclusion truly matter. Social value has been revealed.

xxx Acknowledgements Alongside all of our friends, neighbours, colleagues, and families, we thank John Elkington, Yuval Noah Harahi, Bruno Latour, and Greta Thunberg for continually inspiring us to push forward with social value. We are grateful for the contributions from Laura Alvarez, Nii Ankrah, Jamilia Bentrar, Sophia de Sousa, Lee Ivett, Simon Kay-Jones, Andrew Langley, Emmanuel Manu, Kevin Osbon, Marga Pérez, Sir John Peace, Miranda Plowden, Marsha Smith, and James Willcox. It is a privilege to share your pioneering insights. We extend our thanks to Daniel Fujiwara from Simetrica, Andrew Knight and Paul Whitehouse from Nottingham Trent University, Ayesha Ansar; David Fielding; Azeem Mohammed; and Mark Ollerton from Highways England, Liza Julian and Paul Marriott from RJA Consulting, Carol Davidson and Kathryn Parsons from Gleeds, Sarah Fraser and Charlotte Nye of the Willmott Dixon Foundation, Andrew Geldard of Willmott Dixon, Thomas Holmes and Matt Kamionko from Bowmer & Kirkland, Adam Gilliver from McCann, and Mike Cox from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. Your insights, conversation, and feedback on draft chapters have helped us shape the text and fine-tune the arguments we present. In addition to many of the individuals and organisations named above, we would like to recognise our ongoing relationships with the Association of Researchers in Construction Management (ARCOM), Built Environmental Sustainability, Focus Consultants, the Glass-House Community Led Design, JA Building Services Ltd, the Midlands Engine, Morgan Sindall, Nottingham City Council, South Yorkshire Housing Association, and Studio Loafalo.

Section I

Social value The opportunity

Welcome to Social Value in Practice. This book has a clear purpose: to inspire and galvanise people into action. The first section sets out the context of, and opportunities for, considering, creating, and delivering social value. We draw attention to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which we use throughout the book to connect social value to the global agenda. There are several pressing grand challenges, or wicked problems, which require a coordinated response. Organisations and individuals from all sectors, private, public, and the third sector, are called upon to pool their resources and use their creative energy and unique talents to develop solutions on multiple levels, locally, regionally, nationally, and globally, within organisations and professions. We acknowledge that this is not easy however, and in Chapter 2, we outline some of the problems we have to solve, including the challenges and barriers to social value. Our aim in this chapter is to raise awareness of these issues, and then, in Sections II–IV, we showcase good practice and different ways to respond to these challenges. We invite you to critically reflect on your own practice and values, in all aspects of your life, and to use our book as a springboard for thought and action.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-1

1

Introduction Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Social value is a powerful way to rehumanise people and business. It encourages people to reconnect to the spaces they inhabit and the people and communities they connect with and are part of. It changes the way organisations manage people and the way that businesses relate to each other. It is about participative and collaborative placemaking. It is a way of being and a way of doing. It offers the means for shaping a constructive response to the pressing challenges of our present times: the climate emergency, the Covid-19 pandemic, and increasing inequality in society and in the workplace, to name a few. In this chapter, we reflect upon the evolution of social value practice. We observe a polarisation of views and note our corresponding concern. Our focus is on discussing the most pressing grand challenges of our time: planet, people, and society and how these can be tackled by connecting social value to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Social value In practice, and by many definitions, social value is about the social impact that an individual, organisation, or project makes to the community within which they operate. This can include going about business as usual, or specific bottom-up or strategic initiatives that are focused on making a difference. The range of activities and initiatives are understandably wide and, at the company level, can vary from project to project, by geographical area, and by time. This has resulted in much confusion, and some curious developments too, for example, a drive, by some, to make social value a neatly defined top-down agenda. Although there is some recognition that social value ought to be considered in the local context, the desire to develop an agreed hierarchy of delivery is evident. We argue that it is individuals and communities who ought to be involved in defining their own priorities. Social value was never intended as a state tool. For many reasons, a contextual approach is highly desirable, yet inherently tricky, because the built environment comprises multiple stakeholders, all with differing and competing needs. Seeking to prioritise these needs adds another layer of complexity. DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-2

4  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Possibly, the most explicit articulation of a common agenda, globally, is the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet, and improve the lives and prospects of everyone, everywhere. Since their launch in 2016 (United Nations, 2015a), progress has been made in many places, but, overall, action to meet the goals is not yet advancing at the speed or scale required. Covid-19-related health and economic crises have had major impacts on vulnerable groups and present a serious setback to achieving the goals, especially for disadvantaged population groups and poor countries. Social value is a useful conduit for thinking about what the post-Covid ‘new normal’ looks like (see Latour, 2020). It offers an opportunity to both disrupt and co-create new and inclusive ways of living and working, engaging with a range of stakeholders, and working towards the SDGs. Social value should not be limited to ideas of ‘added value’ that can be bolted to the back of a contract; so much more can be achieved when social value is about rethinking the whole contract to maximise social benefits (Allaway and Brown, 2019). While the SDGs are a universal call to action, social value is a more local, individual, and practitioner-centred vehicle for making a positive contribution. In this book, we show how multiple stakeholders’ efforts join up and achieve systemic level social value and contribute towards many SDGs. It has been a heartening journey to write this book with contributions from so many pioneering practitioners during unprecedented times. In a similar collaborative spirit, we hope to inspire deeper engagement with the principles and intent underpinning social value such that meaningful activity and initiatives that improve economic, social, and environmental well-being are created on many different levels.

Polarisation of practice: measuring added value vis-à-vis value-based business Social value as a concept has evolved rapidly over the last decade or so. More recently, attention and interest in this space have increased monumentally, to the extent that some refer to an emerging ‘social value industry’. This is often said in the context of a growing number of tools, frameworks, and resources for measuring social value, along with the new British Standard on Social Value (BS 8950), and ISO standards (for example, ISO 26000 and 37000). What we observe is a polarisation in the understanding and appreciation of what is means to consider, create, and deliver social value. Divergence and tensions are arising between those who run value-based businesses and do social value, and those who solely focus on measuring social value as an ‘added value’. People and organisations in the latter group are of grave concern. They tend to hold onto an overly keen emphasis on measurement, most commonly by numerical terms, and they see social value as separate to their business, and hence, added value. This group tends to look for simple and measurable activities and outputs that can be reported. To facilitate this, a number of consultancy organisations that can

Introduction  5

Figure 1.1 Polarisation of views on social value.

be employed to produce such reports are gaining market presence and contribute to the development of the social value industry. There is a level of cynicism about this approach to social value, where their real intention is spoken about in hushed voices. The broader implications of a focus on measuring are potentially profound. If it becomes the norm, then organisations who only symbolically engage with social value receive the same legitimacy and benefits as those who substantively engage. Arguably, such legitimacy translates into success in tendering and procurement and that means contractors and consultants are winning work but fail to really engage with the concept. Areas of society that need social value are then left deprived. Although there are many who run value-based businesses and do social value who are very pleased about its increasing visibility in business transactions, conferences, journals, social media, and in general conversations, there are worries about the aspiration to devise a single definition and a list of all things social value. Values-driven people and organisations have naturally integrated social value into the way they work; they have sought to do the right thing and social value has only emerged as a timely descriptor or a useful label for their activities. Our concern is that this polarisation may begin to devalue the concept, and the well-intended principles behind social value that have made it visible over the past decade may be lost. At worst, we fear that: • •

•

Reductionist ‘biggest number wins’ gaming will become prevalent. Those who have always sought to do the right thing, even where it is difficult to report explicitly, will find it difficult to continue in business in the way they have done because their tender packages do not show significant added value. Seeing social value as added value may actually discourage organisations from doing the right thing. Instead, it may encourage them to project their operations as inconsiderate of local communities with poor employment conditions and prospects, since then the opportunity for them to demonstrate added value, from a lower baseline, is greater.

We forward a view whereby social value is seen as a tool to address one of the grand challenges of our time. Grand challenges are ‘specific critical

6  Ani Raiden and Andrew King barriers that, if removed, would help solve an important societal problem with a high likelihood of global impact through widespread implementation’ (George et al., 2016: 1881). We employ social value to help resolve the ‘planet, people and society’ agenda connected to the SDGs. In this way, social value offers much promise, but it does require coordinated and sustained effort from multiple and diverse stakeholders. Our contribution is to spell out the immense opportunities in this space.

Call for action: the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) The most universal and widely adopted grand challenge is the set of 17 SDGs (United Nations, 2015b; George et al., 2016: 1881):

The SDGs are a universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. They work in the spirit of partnership and pragmatism. All United Nations member states are committed to an agenda for sustainable development; ‘a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity’ (United Nations, 2015b: 1), and these three key issues have recently taken centre stage in the responsible business discourse, in literature, and in professional and academic conferences and workshops.1 The SDGs offer a more broadly understood framework against which social value can be considered. While the SDGs are big and bold, and perhaps overwhelming, for example, SDG 1 No poverty, it is important to recognise that every small step towards achieving the SDGs is valuable. There is much good practice already underway in many community and business settings, albeit often in partial, messy, and non-linear ways. We pool together contributions from a diverse range of perspectives and

Introduction  7

Figure 1.2 Global Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2020).

show how the transformation of systems can be developed in incremental, community-shaped, and community-centred ways. We see social value as the practical tool for achieving the SDGs, something that organisations, projects, and people can do, and put in practice. In the same way that social value is about an integrated view of social, economic, and environmental sustainability, the SDGs are interconnected. For example, affordability of energy use and the availability of clean energies (SDG 7) are related directly to health and well-being (SDG 3) and industry, innovation and infrastructure (SDG 9), sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11), and responsible consumption and production (SDG 12). SDGs 3 Good health and well-being, 4 Quality education, 8 Decent work an economic growth, 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure, 10 Reduced inequalities, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, 12 Sustainable consumption and production, 13 Climate action, and 17 Partnerships for the goals feature throughout the many contributions to our book. Some other SDGs are less directly connected to the remit of our book given the contributions we have prioritised (for example, 1 No poverty, 2 Zero hunger, 6 Clean water and sanitation, 14 Life below water, and 15 Life on land), but at least indirectly, social value is really about all the SDGs. The elegance of the SDGs is in the articulation that human progress stems from achieving these clear targets through collective, collaborative, and coordinated effort. (George et al., 2016: 1881) In each section of the book, we visually highlight the SDGs relevant to the discussion using the tiles shown in Table 1.1. This table shows the full descriptor to each SDG and selected targets for each SDG. There are altogether 169

Ch 5, 8, 10, 12, 13

Ch 4, 5, 10

Quality education 4.4. By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults Ensure inclusive and equitable who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, quality education and promote for employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship lifelong learning for all

Gender equality Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

5.1. End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere 5.5. Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life

Ch 4, 8, 9, 12, 13

Good health and 3.5. Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, well-being including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

Ch 12

Ch 12

1.2. By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions

No poverty End poverty in all its forms everywhere

In this book

Zero hunger 2.1. By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in End hunger, achieve food security particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including and improved nutrition, infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round and promote sustainable agriculture

Target examples relevant to our discussion of social value in practice within the built environment

Sustainable Development Goals

Table 1.1 Sustainable Development Goals and examples of targets relevant to our discussion of social value in practice in the built environment (United Nations, 2020)

8  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

8.3. Promote development-oriented policies that support productive Ch activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and 4, 5, 6, 7, innovation, and encourage the formalisation and growth of micro-, 8, 9 10, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to 12 financial services 8.5. By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value 8.6. By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training 9.1. Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all 9.2. Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and, by 2030, significantly raise industry’s share of employment and gross domestic product, in line with national circumstances, and double its share in least developed countries

Decent work and economic growth Promote sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all

Industry, innovation and infrastructure Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation, and foster innovation

(Continued)

Ch 6, 8, 11, 12

Ch 8, 11

7.1. By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services 7.3. By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency

Affordable and clean energy Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and clean energy for all

Ch 11

6b. Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management

Clean water and sanitation Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all

Introduction  9

11.3. By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and Ch capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human 8, 9, 10, 11, settlement planning and management in all countries 12, 13 11.4. Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage Ch 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13

Ch 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

12.5. Substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse 12.7. Promote public procurement practices that are sustainable, in accordance with national policies and priorities

Sustainable cities and communities Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

Responsible consumption and production Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns

Climate action 13.3. Improve education, awareness-raising and Take urgent action to human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, combat climate change and its adaptation, impact reduction and early warning impacts

Ch 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12

10.2. By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status 10.3. Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard

Reduced inequalities Reduce inequality within and among countries

In this book

Target examples relevant to our discussion of social value in practice within the built environment

Sustainable Development Goals

Table 1.1  (Continued)

10  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Ch 9

Ch 9, 11, 13

Ch 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

15.9. By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies and accounts

16.7. Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels

17.17. Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships

Life on land Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and stop and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss Peace, justice and strong institutions Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels Partnerships for the goals Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development

Ch -

14.1. By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution

Life below water Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

Introduction  11

12

Ani Raiden and Andrew King

targets, and so to produce a comprehensive table of all the targets is not feasible. Hence, we have picked a selection that we discuss in the book – the right-hand column indicates the chapter in which discussion relates to the SDG.

What does this book offer? At the heart of this book are things people can pick up, play with, explore, and try out. We seek to demystify social value, make it accessible, and encourage engagement. We offer research-informed and evidence-based support and guidance for practice. We use an infographic approach throughout the book, making pictorial references and links to the SDGs and key information in each chapter. Our text is aimed at informed and reflexive practitioners, and those wishing to explore ideas around social value. Our objective is to showcase real-world examples of good practice. The book is not written as a ‘how to’ manual, but rather as a springboard to action with stories of how people currently ‘live it’, experience it, and do social value. We contextualise social value within the legal framework, ethics, and the economic imperative, with connections to ‘Social Value in Construction’ (Raiden et al., 2019), our first book that laid out the principles and conceptual foundations of social value. Here, we provide an insight into the many and different practical ways in which an organisation or a project can consider, create, and deliver social value, including, but not limited to generating opportunities for employment and training, and managing people (Chapters 4 and 5), procurement (Chapters 6 and 7), frameworks (Chapter 8), community development and regeneration (Chapters 9, 11, 12 and13), placemaking and design (Chapters 9, 11, 12 and 13), and assessing and measuring social value (Chapters 14 and 15). We begin with a discussion about selected drivers, challenges, and opportunities for considering, delivering, and creating social value in Chapter 2. Thereafter, all the other chapters are designed to showcase ways of responding to the challenges and opportunities in constructive and positive ways.

Chapter summary To open the discussion about social value in this book, we have begun by reflecting upon the evolution of social value practice. We observe a polarisation of views and note our concern. Our focus is on connecting to the most pressing grand challenge of our time: planet, people, and society, and the SDGs.

Note 1 For example, Peter Cheese, Welcome Address, the CIPD Festival of Work, 10–15 June 2020; Aligning Local Interventions with the UN Sustainable Developments Goals (SDGs) Conference, Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK, 2 July 2020; and BS 8950 – Guide to Enhancing Social Value, Joint Webinar by BSI, IEMA & SVUK, 1 April 2021.

Introduction  13

References Allaway, B. and Brown, M. (2019) Social value in the built environment: The legal framework in the UK, In Raiden, A., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (Eds) Social Value in Construction, Abingdon: Routledge, 39–59. George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A. and Tihanyi, L. (2016) Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research, Academy of Management Journal, 59, 1880–1895. Latour, B. (2020) What protective measures can you think of so we don’t go back to the pre-crisis production model? http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/ downloads/P-202-AOC-ENGLISH_1.pdf [accessed 10 June 2020]. Raiden, A.B., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (2019) Social value in construction, Abingdon: Taylor and Francis, ISBN: 978-1-13829-509-4. United Nations (2015a) Sustainable Development Goals kick off with start of new year, New York, United Nations, https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ blog/2015/12/sustainable-development-goals-kick-off-with-start-of-new-year/ [accessed 3 May 2021]. United Nations (2015b) Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, United National General Assembly Resolution A/RES/70/1, New York: United Nations. United Nations (2020) Sustainable Development Goals, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs [accessed 3 June 2020].

2

Social value The drivers, challenges, and opportunities Ani Raiden and Andrew King

In this chapter, we focus on the drivers, challenges, and opportunities to consider, create, and deliver social value. We first discuss the context: the growing construction market, workforce composition, skills and labour shortages, the environmental challenges, and community engagement. We show what is problematic about defining and understanding social value, what drives it, and why it is sometimes difficult to ‘make the case’ for it. We then consider different interpretations of value, the assessing and measuring of social value, and finally, the economics and politics of social value. Thereon, in Chapter 3 and onwards, this book shows how people, teams, organisations, industries, and the sector as a whole can act to create and deliver social value. We showcase good practice case studies throughout the book, with real-life exemplars of how clients, consultants, designers and architects, contractors, and others involved in the built environment have considered, created, and delivered social value.

The context: growing construction market, workforce composition, skills and labour shortages, environmental challenges, and community engagement As the global construction market continues to grow, with pre-Covid forecasts suggesting that it will reach US $15.5 trillion by 2030 (PWC, 2017), it requires an ever-larger workforce. Increasing technological development, in areas such as digitisation, means that it will also require workers with new and differing skillsets as reliance on low-skilled labour begins to reduce (CIOB, 2016). At the same time, the global construction market faces increasing labour shortages, with two-thirds of the 64 global markets surveyed by Turner and Townsend suffering from skills shortages; see Table 2.1 (Turner & Townsend, 2019). Many of the markets included in the survey that experience high construction costs face almost continual skills shortages, which only reduce when the market is in recession. In addition, the number of regions ‘in balance’ has reduced as availability of labour falls (Turner & Townsend, 2019). Skills shortages often lead to price inflation and limit construction output. For example, labour and skills shortages fuelled by an ageing workforce and inability to attract younger and more diversified talent were recently DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-3

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   15 Table 2.1 Global construction skills and labour shortage/balance/surplus by region (presented alphabetically) (after Turner & Townsend, 2019) Skills & labour shortage

Supply-demand balance

Skills & labour surplus

Amsterdam Atlanta Auckland Bangalore Beijing Berlin Chicago Christchurch Dublin Frankfurt Guangzhou Hong Kong Indianapolis Jakarta Johannesburg Kampala Kigali Kuala Lumpur London Madrid Melbourne

Barcelona Bogotá Brisbane Buenos Aires Dar es Salaam Doha Harare Ho Chi Minh City Houston Mexico City Moscow Nairobi Paris Perth Santiago Scotland United Arab Emirates

Edmonton Istanbul Muscat Riyadh São Paolo

Munich New York City Northern Ireland Ottawa Phoenix San Francisco Seattle Seoul Shanghai Singapore Stockholm Sydney Tokyo Toronto UK Central UK North UK South Vancouver Vienna Warsaw Zurich

identified as a major constraint on the US construction and infrastructure sector (RICS and AACE, 2020). The surveys in the Asia Pacific and Middle East regions also report severe shortages of skills (RICS, 2020a, 2020b), and the UK faces an extreme construction skills shortage, needing to attract 400,000 more recruits a year (RICS, 2019). Further information is available via the RICS Construction and Infrastructure Survey archive: https://www.rics.org/uk/news-insight/research/market-surveys/globalconstruction-monitor/construction-and-infrastructure-surveys-archive/ Whilst the pandemic has led to reduced output and job losses in some sectors, the rebound in many sectors has led to material and labour shortages and the pressing need to attract new entrants to various roles in the built environment persists. To keep the construction industry producing over the short-term, there has been a heavy reliance on two main routes: migrant workers and existing employees deferring their retirement and working for longer. This is not sustainable, and without action, some argue that there would be up to 25% reduction in the construction workforce within a decade (Farmer, 2016). At this point, construction could no longer play its significant role in contributing to GDP and serving society through the delivery

16  Ani Raiden and Andrew King of critical infrastructure, homes, and built assets that support business and industry (ibid). In particular, Farmer’s review highlights the disconnect between Higher Education leavers’ skills and employer needs, the survivalist business models that form the foundation of much of the industry (predicated on low capital reserves in an environment driven by high cyclicality of demand), and long-term under-investment in training and development as key issues needing urgent attention (Farmer, 2016). The industry struggles to attract a diverse workforce, in the main failing to be of interest to young people, women, ethnic minorities, and lesbian, gay, transgender/transsexual, asexual, intersex, queer, and questioning (LGBT+) entrants. The CIOB is clear that women and ethnic minorities are dissuaded from joining because of the way the industry is perceived as a career for white males who earn little pay and work long hours (CIOB, 2009). These issues have contributed to an image problem that is deep-rooted and grounded in associations with manual work that takes place over long hours in a transient, dirty, noisy environment and is increasingly associated with mental-health problems and suicide. Although technological developments, including digitisation and greater adoption of modern methods of construction will, over time, reduce the need for on-site labour, there is still a need to recruit significant numbers to fill: • • •

Traditional crafts-based roles Professional and management roles, and to Bring in new digital skills.

Greater automation and reliance on big data and artificial intelligence will disrupt industries and working practices within the sector (Sherratt, 2020) (as with every sector) on a scale not seen before, requiring people to go through increasing career changes throughout their working lives (see, for example, Harari, 2018). In summary, the need to recruit new workers for a range of positions is largely being unmet. In this book, we explore ways to attract people to the sector (see Chapters 4,, 5, 6, 8, and 10). Whilst the health of the construction industry, based on increased output, is often used as an indicator of economic health, from an environmental perspective, the opposite is true. Continued exponential growth comes at an unsustainable environmental cost. The sector produced 39% of energy and process-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and accounted for 36% of final energy use in 2018; 11% of which was a direct consequence of building materials and product manufacturing (Global ABC, 2019). Do we need everything we build? Clearly not. A cursory tour of the new cities being created in developing nations shows that many currently lay empty, their intent focused

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   17 around their utility as investment vehicles. The wickedness of the problem not only comes from the current relationship between economic growth and environment decay. Population growth is a heady factor that further complicates the problem. The global population is predicted to rise by 2 billion people from 2019 to 2050 (7.7 billion to –9.7 billion), with the number of people who live in urban areas doubling to 70% of the population (United Nations, 2019). These people will need housing and access to infrastructure that will hugely increase the environmental load at a time when we need to reduce our impact on the environment. Such an increase creates huge pressure on resources with energy use expected to increase by 80% (OECD, 2012) and a staggering 3.9 billion people experiencing water-insecurity (Guppy and Anderson, 2017). So what do we do to tackle these wicked problems? The current mainstream approach, that of scaring people into action, is clearly having a minimal impact (Eisenstein, 2019). Whilst a raft of approaches show great potential, such as solar/concentrated solar, biomass, wave and tidal, regenerative agriculture, net-zero buildings, walkable cities, bike infrastructure, green roofs and heat pumps to name a few (Hawken, 2017), we need to more fundamentally consider what we build and why we build it. To do this, we need to look beyond the veil of continual growth and instead involve people and communities in the conversation and see the built environment as an end in itself. Our focus here is to point to the complex and evolving way that social value and the environment interrelate. This topic is understandably vast, and many thinkers and disruptors are changing the way we interact and deal with these hugely important problems. Whilst it is difficult to point to a shortlist to engage with, the following offer a useful starting point: https://charleseisenstein.org/ https://drawdown.org/ http://thackara.com/ https://volans.com/ https://www.ynharari.com/ Following on with the theme of community engagement in the built environment, one problematic issue is defining the relevant communities of local people. For example, some projects span across wide geographical areas. Questions arise around ‘how are communities selected in, or excluded from, the processes?’, ‘how can we engage those who don’t typically have the means, or social capital, to engage with construction and infrastructure projects?’, and ‘should we deliberately target harder to reach communities, or groups which may involve much deeper integration and commitment to a project?’. Trust in authorities and processes of community engagement can be a challenge, especially in situations where there is a perceived lack of depth or scope in the process and a top-down approach. Also, collaboration with many diverse stakeholder groups can prove to be

18  Ani Raiden and Andrew King difficult. Communities may feel disenfranchised where they are not seen as an immediate priority (see for example Boyle and Michell, 2020). Close and Loosemore (2014) find that few construction professionals have the skills to engage with communities effectively, and many see it as a burdensome, costly, and time-consuming exercise, which is a liability rather than an asset. There appears to be an assumption that community consultation is the responsibility of urban planners before work starts on site. Some of the criticisms of socially engaged design practice include the length of time architects and others are embedded in a community, how these projects can become a ‘sticking plaster’ (for an underfunded welfare state), and concerns over the legacy after they finish. We discuss stakeholder analysis in Chapter 3 and showcase good practice on engaging communities in Chapters 9–13. Beyond these wider contextual issues around the growing construction market, workforce composition, skills and labour shortages, environmental challenges and community engagement, all of which social value initiatives can help develop responses to, a key challenge in the field centres around the fundamental question: what is social value?

What is ‘social value’? At present, there are many definitions of social value and several different ways that organisations are doing social value. In this section, we discuss the difficulties that take much air space in this area: first, we consider two different approaches to defining social value and the related problems and benefits, before we present a short Q&A to address key questions that more directly answer ‘what is social value’. Defining social value Many industry guides call for a single, unified definition of social value. We reject this idea, although we appreciate that it would make it easier for everyone to be working to the same understanding and expectations, and it would help standardise practice. To us, it is crystal clear that:

Social value is contextual and contingent upon the specific and ever-changing circumstances and needs of the local communities within which construction and infrastructure works are built.

A single agreed definition therefore may not suit the industry, organisation, project, community, or individual needs that are most pressing at any one time. Also, a universalist approach constrains innovation.

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   19 Therefore, necessarily, there ought to be room for many different bespoke definitions that reflect the priorities and focus of particular circumstances. Yes, this means that there will be variability in the use of terms, meaning that it can be difficult for project partners to understand, agree upon, and meet differing requirements, and it will be challenging to measure and report social value. However, the benefits of such a tailored approach to social value far outweigh these issues: it allows for flexibility and an opportunity to develop responses to unique organisation, project, and community-relevant situations. As the needs and focus are likely to change over time and vary widely by geographical location, definitions of social value should reflect this. Most importantly, there will be an opportunity to engage a variety of partners and respond to their point of view, instead of a top-down-imposed model of practice (see our discussion on stakeholder analysis and managing stakeholder relations in Chapter 3 for further discussion on the last point). Table 2.2 offers an outline of the benefits and problems with the two approaches to defining social value. We work to the following definition: the social impact any individual, organisation, project or programme makes to the lives of internal and external stakeholders affected by its activities.

Table 2.2 Different approaches to defining social value and related benefits and problems Approach to defining social value

Benefits

One universally agreed definition

•

Many different bespoke definitions

• •

•

•

•

Problems

Everyone is working to the • same understanding and expectations Helps standardise practice • Allows for flexibility • Opportunity to develop a unique organisation, project, community specific approach • Needs and focus will change over time and • definitions should reflect this Opportunity to engage a variety of partners from • their point of view

May not suit the industry, organisation, project, or community needs Constrains innovation Hinders the development of a common or shared understanding of what social value is about Variability in the use of terms Can be difficult for project partners to understand and meet differing requirements Challenging to measure and report

20  Ani Raiden and Andrew King The British Standard (BS 8950) defines social value as ‘a net positive change in human wellbeing and assumes that the enhancement of social value is in the long-term interests of all of us’ (Levitt, 2020: 2). Throughout this book, we show how social value means different things to different people and different types of organisations, small, medium, and large; public, private, and third sector. For example, in Chapters 4 and 5, we discuss what social value means in the context of work, employment, and training; in Chapters 6 and 7, we consider social value in procurement and the circular economy, and present three different case studies of innovation. In Chapter 8, we outline a commercial consultant organisation’s approach to social value. In Chapter 9, we portray a client perspective, and in Chapter 10, we showcase a large construction contractor’s social value journey. Each is significantly different in how they define social value, and rather than that being a problem, collectively they offer a considerable contribution, both internally within their organisations and externally to the communities within which they operate. Table 2.3 presents a short Q&A on what social value is about. We encourage people to reflect upon what social value means for them, personally and professionally. This naturally extends to considering what it means for the contextual and contingent circumstances and needs of the local communities within which construction and infrastructure works are built (that are both specific and ever-changing).

Table 2.3 What is social value Q&A Q

A

How do you define social value?

There are all-purpose definitions that may work as a starting point, such as that forwarded by us, or one by the British Standards shown above, or this one by Emerson (2000): ‘Social value is being created when resources, inputs, processes or policies are combined to generate improvements in the lives of individuals or society as a whole’. We encourage everyone to explore the different definitions, reflect on what social value means to them, and discuss with others. There are many ways to create social value, including generating employment opportunities and favourable conditions of employment, training, social procurement, adopting circular vision and business models, safeguarding environment, collaborative and participative design and placemaking, urban planning. We address all of these themes in this book. No, it is generally understood that there are three converging aspects to sustainability: social, environmental, and economic sustainability. Social value encompasses them all.

How can we create social value?

Is social value different from sustainability?

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   21 Q

A

Is social value about compliance with law?

Yes, in part. There are laws and regulations that relate to social value, for example, • the Public Services (Social Value) Act in the UK • various EU Directives • South Africa’s Preferential Procurement Policy Framework (2000) • legislation about environment and employment worldwide. However, social value is also much more than compliance with legislation, as we show throughout this book. Generally, no. At best, social value is embedded in the business model of an organisation and recognised as important for the sector as a whole, disseminated through industry-wide bodies, professional bodies and through the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It can be useful to have specific projects which focus on social value too, for example, to engage with particular community groups. Some talk of an emerging ‘social value industry’ where overly keen focus is placed on measuring social value. We discuss this in Chapters 1, 10, and 14. Social procurement differs from traditional procurement in that it seeks to leverage extra social benefits and create social value in local communities, beyond the simple act of purchasing the requisite products and services. We discuss this in detail in Chapters 6 and 7. In terms of good practice, no. Enhancing the opportunities and conditions relating to employment is one of the simplest ways for organisations to consider, create, and deliver social value. We discuss this in Chapter 4. In practice they have much in common. The main difference is that social value is philosophically more of a core concept that lies at the heart of socially responsible action. Social value can relate to individuals as well as organisations and corporations. CSR is about the continuing voluntary commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute economic development whilst improving the quality of life of their workforce, the local community, and society at large (Watts and Holme, 2003). There is a business case and often a moral argument for both CSR and social value. CSR has been criticised for a lack of conceptual clarity (much like social value), and that organisations have used it as a mere publicity stunt to distract and misdirect stakeholders (an issue emerging in relation to social value too). Another difference is that social value benefits from legal provisions in many countries, unlike CSR, which is still mainly voluntary (see Lin, 2019).

Should social value be a standalone ‘special project’?

Are social value and social procurement different from procurement? Is social value different to managing people/HR? Is social value different from Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)?

(Continued)

22  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Table 2.3  (Continued) Q

A

How do the SDGs and social value relate to each other? Is social value about charity?

Social value is a national and organisation level tool for achieving the SDGs. The SDGs are a universal, global call for action.

Why is social value important to me/my business?

Not really, it is about considerate and humane ways of acting, relating, and doing business. Some specific projects may focus on charitable causes. There are three key drivers for social value: • •

•

Legislation and regulations: certain projects must consider, create, and deliver social value Client-led demand: social value is important to an increasing number of clients, hence it makes good business sense to take advantage of this opportunity to maximise the pool of potential clients It is ‘the right thing to do’ (see Chapter 14)

Doing social value One of the limitations of the current debate on social value in the built environment is that it is too heavily focused on the construction stage of projects, because this is where new emerging social procurement policy is being aimed (Raiden et al., 2019). This is problematic because it limits the opportunity to make a positive contribution. Social value can be created over the entire life cycle of a construction project, including urban planning, project planning, design, and operational phases. Indeed, the earlier in a project one starts thinking about social value, the better. Chapters 9 and 11–13 in this book show exactly how proactive planning and design can achieve social value. Social value is a vehicle for addressing a grand challenge, such as the SDGs, as we show in Chapter 1. Social Enterprise UK (2019) also sees social value as a critical tool for ‘delivering an alternative vision for society’ and they specify three priorities: •

•

We must put the needs and values of people at the centre of decision-making. Markets, when they work well, should take into account wider social and environmental impacts and ethical value to the consumer alongside the cost of production. We need a new covenant between people, the state, and business. The second change is a need to challenge the notion that growth alone is good. We need to improve society and protect our planet; we must deploy our resources (private and public) more effectively to deliver better outcomes for people. The focus should be on real value and transformation, and inclusive economy and inclusive growth.

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   23 •

We need to look at the structure of the entities that deliver goods and services and move beyond a binary sense that either the state or for-profit businesses are the only two choices. We also need a richer diversity of organisations delivering goods and services across the economy and society. This may consist of more social enterprises, including cooperatives and community businesses alongside traditional voluntary and community groups. Some of these will be small organisations with specialised expertise, whilst others will be large entities with scale and reach.

This is a radical departure from the current market-driven and competitive form it often takes. At present, the doing of social value is unfortunately often limited to small, localised, bottom-up initiatives and activities that can be easily measured. As such, the opportunity to create and deliver transformational value over long-term is lost.

Drivers for social value There are three key drivers for social value: 1 2 3

Legislation and the regulatory frameworks that govern the built environment are increasingly mindful and wanting of social value. It makes good business sense to try and make the most of the opportunities created by client-led demand for value-based business transactions. The argument for ethically sound decision-making in business is very strong: social value is the right thing to do.

These are mostly structural and ideological arguments, and it is people in businesses: managers making decisions and workers carrying out the instructions to work, who are on the centre stage in considering, delivering, and creating social value. There lies perhaps the greatest challenge that forwards a major obstacle in the way of realising the full potential to achieve social value and the SDGs. That is, in short, a mindset which either aligns well with the principles of social value or does not. This mindset can be understood as social value orientation and it explains why people with ‘prosocial’ social value orientations embrace and endorse the concept and why and how it can be difficult to achieve buy-in from those who are driven by competition or individualism. Sometimes, individuals with ‘proself’ social value orientations lean on an ‘X is a business decision’ argument in order to try and separate personal values and ethics that form organisational decision-making. Freeman et al. (2010: 6) term this a ‘separation fallacy’ and argue that this is the genesis of the problem of how ethics and capitalism relate. We explore social value orientation next, and then frame the discussion around the structural and ideological arguments (legislation, business case, and ethics), consider why they are constructed and necessary, and what some of the challenges related to each are.

24  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Figure 2.1 What is social value and what is driving it?

Social value orientation Social value orientation is a concept that explains the motivations that individuals bring to bear on business social interactions and how they are often broader and more multifaceted than a simple aim of pursuit of personal outcomes or rational self-interest (van Lange, 1999). Social value orientation refers to preferences for particular patterns of outcomes for the self and others on the basis of a typology or a continuum, as shown in Figure 2.2. People who hold a ‘prosocial’ social value orientation lean towards altruism, cooperation, or equality. Altruists are motivated to help others in need. Members of this category are low in self-interest. They willingly sacrifice their own outcomes in the hopes of helping others achieve gain. Cooperation refers to maximising outcomes for the self and others, and those who focus on equality put effort into minimising absolute differences between their own and others’ outcomes. People with ‘proself’ social value orientation focus on individualism: maximising outcomes for the self with little or no regards for others’ outcomes, or they focus on competition: maximising their relative advantage over others’ outcomes. This is unfortunately too often the normal mode of operation in the highly commercialised and hard-nosed construction industry. An individual’s social value orientation is thought to be relatively stable (comparable to other individual difference type variables, like intelligence and personality) yet open to modification, particularly over a longer period of time (van Lange, 1999) as it is the environment that often shapes

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   25

PROSELF

social value orientation

PROSOCIAL

Cooperation: maximising outcomes for the self and others maximising relative advantage over maximising outcomes for the self Equality: minimisation of absolute with little or no regards for others’ outcomes differences between own and others’ outcomes others’outcomes Competition:

high

Individualism

self-interest

Altruistic orientation: altruists are motivated to help others in need low

Figure 2.2 Social value orientation (after Messick and McClintock, 1968; Kelley and Stahelski, 1970; Griesinger and Livingston, 1973; Kelley and Thibault, 1978).

individual’s social value orientation and moral development (for a discussion about moral development, see, for example, Fleming, 2005). Social value orientation has been shown to be predictive of important behavioural variables, such as cooperative behaviour in social dilemmas (Balliet et al., 2009), helping behaviour (McClintock and Allison, 1989), pro-environmental behaviour (van Vugt et al., 1996), and negotiation behaviour (de Dreu and van Lange, 1995). Individuals with a prosocial social value orientation are more sensitive to social norms and evaluate social dilemmas in terms of morality, whereas those with individualistic social value orientation assess social dilemmas in terms of strength and power (Grosch and Rau, 2017). Individualistic social value orientation works to egocentric motives or needs, seeking favourable outcomes in terms of respect from others and a positive sense of self-worth (van Prooijen et al., 2012). These differences in how prosocials and those with an individualistic social value orientation perceive and approach situations extend to considerations and evaluation of procedures and decision-making. Given that individuals with a prosocial social value orientation are more sensitive to social norms and evaluate social dilemmas in terms of morality, it follows that:

People with prosocial social value orientation are likely to be more attuned to the moral implications and social impact of their activities. Such awareness will, in turn, play into their decision-making and impact on the priorities and a range of variables in consideration. Prosocials are defined in terms of enhancing collective and equality outcomes (van Prooijen et al., 2012: 1248) and thus their attention, interest, and support for social value creation are stronger.

26  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Given that social value orientation is open to modification, it allows some room for negotiation, however. In practical terms, this means that although individuals will approach situations according to their social value orientation, their behaviour over long-term will be determined by the responses of others. For example, those with a proself orientation (individualism/competition) will approach situations with others in a manner that maximises outcomes for the self or over others’ outcomes, and they will continue to do so until others fail to exhibit proself behaviour. They may then turn to cooperation, a pattern known as behavioural assimilation. In this way, a strong lead from senior managers and other advocates for social value may influence and help engage a range of people and engender support for considering, creating, and delivering social value (even from those who may naturally be aligned with proself social value orientation). That social value orientation is open to modification is also problematic: those with a prosocial orientation (cooperation/altruism/equality) will approach situations in a prosocial manner and continue to do so until others fail to exhibit prosocial behaviour. They may then turn to non-cooperation, through behavioural assimilation, for example, because their voice is lost, or the organisational values and culture do not lend support for prosocial behaviour. Hence, senior management support and leadership are important ingredients for social value (see Chapters 4, 10, 11, and 13). It follows that one management challenge relating to social value is that much relies on the senior managers’ social value orientation and their commitment to social value. Senior management support underpins much organisational activity and social value is no different. Where social value receives limited attention in strategic documentation and/or in strategy making and management speak, a follow-on problem becomes that of achieving buy-in and support for such strategic objectives. If members of an organisation, middle managers and employees, or parties within the supply chain, sense that social value is seen as a ‘nice to have add-on’ or is in the ‘must do’ category solely owing to legal obligations and is on the periphery of professional practice, then it will be difficult to ensure that social value will be taken seriously or acted upon with the same interest and effort as other strategic objectives that are more enthusiastically and explicitly endorsed. In summary, social value orientation is both an important driver and a potential barrier for considering, creating, and delivering social value. An environment and organisational culture which promotes ‘psychological safety’ (Delizonna, 2017) and allows for people to feel they can speak their mind – the first step towards identifying social value orientation – is important in envisaging how social value orientation may play out in any specific organisation or project team. Further information about psychological safety is available via: https://hbr.org/2017/08/high-performing-teams-need-psychologicalsafety-heres-how-to-create-it

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   27 For information about measuring social value orientation, see, for example: Murphy, R.O., Ackermann, K.A. and Handgraaf, M.J.J. (2011) Measuring social value orientation, Judgment and Decision Making, 6(8), 771–781. Ethics In our first book, Social Value in Construction (Raiden et al., 2019), we present a theoretical foundation and justification for social value from moral philosophy. We draw on specific moral theories from utilitarian, Kantian, and existential philosophers to explore why promoting social value is morally praiseworthy. The general conclusion is that social value has strong theoretical support, as it is the right thing to do. However, we acknowledge that although moral theory has the power to inform our decision-making, ultimately, we are free autonomous agents, as demonstrated above in relation to social value orientation. In this book, we discuss ethics in Chapter 14. Legislation and the regulatory frameworks Since people’s interpretations and behaviour relating to what is acceptable or ‘good’ vary widely, locally and globally, legislation and regulatory frameworks set out standards that are considered reasonable at a societal level. We note in Table 2.3 that there are social value laws and regulatory frameworks, such as the Public Services (Social Value) Act in the UK, various EU Directives, and the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework (2000) in South Africa, that specific organisations must comply with. There is also worldwide environment and employment legislation. Environmental regulation provides protection to the environment, safeguards natural resources, and controls pollution. Employment law is designed to protect the welfare of employees and ensure that employers and workers are aware of their mutual responsibilities. As societies and the world of work evolves, so does legislation. Whilst legislation is often a necessary force for good, it is not without its problems: • • • •

People will see it as something they ‘have to’ do and thus may not believe in it or put their best into the project Laws tend to be prescriptive rather than empowering May encourage ‘seeking loops’ behaviour Difficult to implement and police.

The business case Finally, the third powerful driver for social value is ‘the business case’. Where historically the business case is largely seen as being focused on

28  Ani Raiden and Andrew King profit-making and securing a sound return on investment, increasingly it makes good business sense to incorporate a broader range of considerations. The ‘economic imperative’, to establish sustainable business models and lasting competitive advantage, is still relevant to organisations (small, medium, and large; private and public sector; social enterprises; and others) and it also sits at the heart of much decision-making at a societal, political, and global level. If there are not enough funds to run a business, the organisation or project will simply not survive. In Chapter 8, we present a model from a consultancy business where the business case for social value is transparent. Considerations beyond financial interest are forging their way into the discussion about the business case as we grow increasingly aware of the differences in well-being and economic prosperity locally and globally (see Lansley, 2015). ‘Inequality’ in labour markets and in societies generally draws attention to considering diversity and inclusion (see Chapters 4, 5, 10, and 12). There is also client-led demand for value-based business transactions and societal systems – we showcase these in Chapters 9 and 13. Moreover, the benefits of sustainable and inclusive business are clear. For example, research demonstrates the business benefits of meeting the SDGs: $12 trillion in revenues and savings could be generated by 2030 by focusing on the 60 largest business opportunities (Business and Sustainable Development Commission, 2017). For a fuller discussion of regenerative capitalism, see https://volans.com/ project/green-swans/

Differences between organisations, professions, and interpretations of value Each organisation is unique, with a distinctive mission and vision, organisational structure, strategy, and systems, culture, values, and employees. Much good practice on social value is built on cross-sector collaboration. However, one of the challenges in cross-sector collaborations is developing an appreciation and understanding of how different organisations operate and what specific difficulties they face. The purpose of the organisation differs by sector: Private sector organisations have a primary responsibility to provide return on investment to shareholders (though there is a growing movement to shift the dial towards focusing on stakeholder capitalism, which takes account of the needs of all stakeholders, as well as society at large). We showcase how a number of case examples are doing this in Chapters 6–8, 10, and 12. Public sector organisations work to the so-called ‘public sector ethos’. Although there is much variation in what this means, values like integrity, honesty, objectivity, impartiality, accountability, community responsibility, altruistic motivation, bureaucracy, and customer service are often associated with the public sector ethos. We discuss one exemplar in Chapter 13.

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   29 The third sector includes voluntary and community organisations (both registered charities and other organisations such as associations, self-help groups, and community groups), professional bodies, social enterprises, and cooperatives. They are values-driven and motivated by the desire to achieve social goals, for example, improving public welfare, the environment or economic well-being, rather than the desire to distribute profit. They reinvest any surpluses generated in the pursuit of their goals (see Chapters 6 and 9). In Chapter 6, we also introduce Certified B Corporations, which balance purpose and profit. It is clear that the different types of organisations differ considerably in terms of their core purpose. The difficulties in understanding different points of view, and differences in focus, priorities, timeframes, policy, procedures, and practices can result in challenges managing interorganisational relations. For example, public sector organisations often have long-term goals, whereas private sector organisations tend to have a shorter-term, transactional project focus. There are also differences within the sectors, for instance, between best practice pioneers and those who take a compliance approach. For example, in the UK, where the Social Value Act places emphasis on the public sector in leading on social value, adoption by local authorities has been inconsistent: less than half of local councils have a social value policy (Social Enterprise UK, 2019). There are also differences in the way organisations operate because of the size of their operations, and the value-base and social value orientation of those in leadership positions. Troje (2020) also found that an organisation’s maturity and experience with social value related activity impacts upon the support and resources that are committed to projects. Furthermore, the built environment is made up of a wide variety of professions (for example, architecture, planning, surveying, and engineering of various forms, and facilities management), which all focus on different aspects of the sector, such as design, construction, or management. These differences in organisations and professions lead to diverse interpretations of ‘value’. Understandings of value in a business context have traditionally been informed by an economic perspective with a focus on: • • •

Value in use, which refers to the function of a service, or a product, that satisfies a need or generates pleasure for its owner. Value in exchange, which relates to the worth, or the monetary sums, for which the service or product can be traded. Esteem value, which relates to the functions of prestige, appearance, and/ or other nonquantifiable benefits, such as purchasing something simply for the sake of possession (see Griffith et al., 2003; Kelly et al., 2007).

A particular service, or product, may have a high value in use, but a relatively low value in exchange, for example, water. Alternatively, a service, or product,

30  Ani Raiden and Andrew King may have a high value in exchange, but a low value in use, for example, diamonds. This is known as the paradox of value. It demonstrates that market prices do not necessarily reflect personal notions of value – a problem that lies at the heart of controversies around the monetisation of social value using techniques such as social return on investment (SROI). In the context of the built environment, the paradox of value also helps to explain why market prices can often inadequately reflect the social value of construction and infrastructure developments when the value in use (for various stakeholders) is high, but the value in exchange is relatively low. A good example of this is social housing provision within a deprived area where houses offer high social value by providing homes for disadvantaged occupants (who may otherwise be homeless), whilst financial market capitalisation opportunities for investors are small – a common problem faced by many social entrepreneurs. Architecture and design work often carry high esteem value. However, evaluation of such value is subjective, and thus very difficult to measure. Measuring value then becomes an exercise of appreciating and considering often complex and competing questions about value in use, value in exchange, and esteem value. In Raiden et al. (2019), we also discuss ‘public value’ and ‘shared value’, two specific ideas that have emerged to promote socially aware value management. They represent joined up-thinking about the relationship between economic, social, and environmental goals, and stakeholder management (see Chapter 3), much like social value. Public value is limited in its focus on the public sector only, and shared value critics argue that many companies are struggling to implement this approach, and that it will never maximise shared value as it places economic value generation on a par with social value creation. This means that social problems without a business case (or value in exchange) will be at risk of being neglected. This conceptual diversity results in difficulties for interpreting, evaluating, assessing, and measuring social value. We discuss these issues next, and also in further detail in Chapter 14.

Assessing and measuring social value Assessment and measurement of social value is increasingly important, yet remain one of the most contested issues in social value policy, research, and practice. We focus on two themes here: the emerging differences in organisational practice regarding measuring versus the doing of social value, and the challenges related to the processes of assessing and measuring social value. Measuring versus doing social value In Chapter 1, we observe a polarisation in the understanding and appreciation of what it means to consider, create, and deliver social value.

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   31 Divergence and tensions are arising between those who focus on measuring social value as ‘added value’ and those who run value-based businesses. People and organisations in the former group are of specific concern. They tend to hold onto an overly keen emphasis on measurement, and they see social value as something other than part of their business, and hence added value. For them, it takes extra effort to consider, create, and deliver social value and as such they ought to be rewarded for this, at least indirectly, for example, by winning bids because of their promised ‘added value’. Challenges related to the processes of assessing and measuring social value Developing skills and systems to assess and measure social value is difficult because of: • • • •

•

•

The complexity of social value and the resulting lack of standardisation and consistency used in assessments makes comparisons difficult The monetised approach grossly oversimplifies the many nuances, variables, and complexities in fully understanding the social value created by any intervention Problems comparing social value measurements over different periods of time and different projects and programmes, since value means different things at different times to different people Confusion about the different terms that are used; for example, we note that ‘outputs’, ‘outcomes’, and ‘impacts’ are sometimes used interchangeably, although outputs are the direct and tangible products and services an organisation’s activities have created or delivered; outcomes refer to the changes in people’s lives, for example, happiness, self-esteem, knowledge and skills, relationships, behaviours; and impact is the net outcome of the activities, outputs, and outcomes, taking into account various counterfactuals, such as reducing benefit over time, displacement, and substitution (Raiden et al., 2019) Questions of whether construction professionals are currently equipped to measure the social impact of the industry’s activities. Practitioners in the sector have traditionally excluded communities from consultation, design, and construction processes, seeing them as a risk rather than an asset, and have not developed the skills or inclination to effectively understand their needs and aspirations The potential for a rigid approach to measuring social value to reduce innovation in the design of social programmes intended to meet community needs. It is likely that they would be misaligned, both with the constantly changing and varied needs of the communities in which buildings and infrastructure are built, and with the many organisations in the supply chain that deliver them

32  Ani Raiden and Andrew King • •

The diversity in the sector: there are many large, medium, and small contractors and consultants, operating across a wide range of building types and geographic project areas The recommendation that any assessment approach must be proportionate to the time and resources available, size of the organisation measuring, and the risk and scope for the intervention being delivered, and this is particularly relevant to the built environment, given the large numbers of small firms that dominate the sector.

Therefore, devising a standardised set of social impact indicators in a topdown and one-size-fits-all fashion would not only ignore the diversity of the built environment, but would make it difficult to fairly and objectively capture the huge variety of potential social value created at multiple levels and sit uncomfortably with the key need for proportionality. Indeed, in our first book, we warned that the wrong indicators could provide a perverse incentive, driving behaviours in the wrong direction away from the effective delivery of socially valuable outcomes, or even lead organisations to ‘game the system’, organising themselves to maximise their achievements against inappropriate indicators, rather than to achieve the greatest social impact in response to community needs (Raiden et al., 2019), and we now see evidence of exactly this happening. The flipside is that the lack of standardisation makes it more difficult for managers and policymakers to argue with confidence that the impact of their policies or activities have made a real difference in the communities in which they operate. Also, the different systems that organisations may need to operate, in parallel, may have conflicting priorities (see Chapter 10 for an example of this). Forward thinking practitioners are grappling with the challenge related to assessing social value longitudinally and trying to work out how to measure the benefit of interventions beyond the life of a particular project or programme of works. They ask, for example, ‘how do you maintain contact with individuals you might first engage with at secondary school and follow them through their further training and qualification into actively working for your organisation or your supply chain?’ The pioneers working at the forefront of thinking about social value assessment and measurement experience continuous learning and frustration simultaneously. They have to be flexible and accommodate mid-project changes to systems (for example, when there is a change in proxy measures). As with any set of new measures, there is a period of trial and error where the system doesn’t quite work out in practice. Ultimately, at the heart of the challenge on assessing and measuring social value exists a conflict between the subjective nature of the concept and the objective way it is expected to be measured and communicated (Watts et al., 2019).

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   33

The economics and politics of social value We note in Raiden et al. (2019) that whilst there are many passionate advocates for social value, it is critical to understand the political context in which our work is set: •

•

•

•

•

Delivering social value to a community will inevitably involve a wide variety of stakeholders with a wide variety of interests, priorities, and relationships, which will need to be carefully navigated to identify and deliver the outcomes the community needs. This can be difficult The idea of involving the private sector in tackling social problems, and ultimately welfare provision, is inherently political and highly controversial in itself. For many critics, involving private firms in the delivery of welfare to society is simply a rhetorical ‘coverup’ for the dismantling of the welfare state and justifying government austerity programmes If poorly designed and implemented, social procurement policies, for example, can lead to an inefficient mix of production across the economy and encourage perverse market behaviour. Community resentment and dissatisfaction can also result from tokenistic compliance instead of a genuine concern for inequality Third sector organisations that become part of the diversified construction supply chains through social procurement can dislodge other local businesses which also provide important employment and social benefits for society (and may be more efficient in doing so) Lack of agreement and discipline around the practice of assessing and measuring social value, which makes it difficult to consistently communicate and evidence the costs and benefits of social value interventions.

Also, within local authorities, councillors tend to be focused on driving their own agenda over a relatively short-term (for example, four years), but many outcomes of social value initiatives and programmes of activity are realised over the longer term. As such, it can be difficult to ensure continuity and support. Furthermore, at present, many clients that are interested in promoting circular economy goals for their projects report that there is a lack of supply chains with the necessary expertise of the circular economy, a lack of circular construction materials in the market that they could specify for their projects, and even a lack of designers (architects and engineers) with circular economy expertise. On the contrary, practitioners on the supply side argue that clients have the ultimate responsibility of setting agenda for change by specifying circular requirements for projects to which they can then respond to by adapting their processes and practices to meet these requirements. This type of transfer of responsibility is a long-standing issue and requires a cultural shift towards more collaborative, rather than competitive, working relationships – this is not an easy change to achieve.

34  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Finally, research on social procurement in Australia (Loosemore et al., 2020) indicates that the barriers to integrating disadvantaged groups into the construction workforce are many and varied. Rather than reducing disadvantage for the most marginalised groups in society (indigenous people, people with disabilities, women, disengaged youth, migrants, refugees, and ex-offenders), complying with emerging social procurement policies could have the opposite effect. Subcontractors see significant business risks associated with safety, productivity, and costs, and their employment priorities reflect these perceptions. Thus, introducing social procurement policies is risky without sufficient support and regard for an industry’s culture, structure, and capacity to deliver. Similarly, in the UK, the government’s ambitious target of three million apprenticeship starts between 2015 and 2020 has proven impossible to meet. The apprenticeship levy fund, introduced in 2017, delivered a simple way to fund apprenticeships suited to larger employers. In order to provide benefits to a range of employers, it also incorporated a transfer mechanism whereby unspent funds could be transferred to smaller non-levy-paying organisations. However, there have been concerns that the transfer system is bureaucratic and confusing, and few smaller employers have made use of the fund. The Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) found that 2/5 of 135 providers rejected small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) who wanted to recruit apprentices due to a lack of levy funds (AELP, 2020). In addition, since it was introduced, the levy has funded more higher-level apprenticeships for those from relatively prosperous communities, which means that this significant investment misses those who need it the most (Social Mobility Commission, 2020). The number of apprenticeship starts by those from disadvantaged backgrounds dropped 36% between 2015/2016 and 2017/2018, and the degree apprenticeships figures are even more concerning: only 13% of this increasingly popular route is trodden by those from disadvantaged backgrounds (Social Mobility Commission, 2020). These systemic issues create vicious circles, whereby the lack of awareness of apprenticeships and the many benefits of construction careers, for example, lead to them not being adequately promoted in schools’ careers counselling.

Bureaucracy Because of the abovementioned perceptions related to the levy transfer system, and the emerging trend by some to focus on measuring social value by complicated numerical procedures and the associated emergence of the social value industry, there is a danger that social value becomes associated with complex procedures, paperwork, legislation, and regulations. This is a distraction from the fundamental principles of social value and doing the right thing.

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   35 Since social value is an emerging concept, and both guidance and organisational practice are developing, at present, there is a lack of information in the mainstream, and lack of knowledge, skills, and specialist personnel in the field. Increasing legislation and top-down frameworks are not the answer however, as various regulations and frameworks can be seen to be conflicting and become overwhelming. Our intention is to showcase good practice in social value from a variety of perspectives, to inspire thought and action in this space, and to encourage all organisations and practitioners to believe that they can make a difference, where they take small or big steps towards the achievement of the SDGs. This is a time to stand up, get involved, and shape the way social value develops. Collective progress for all is key.

Chapter summary In this chapter, we have discussed the context: growing construction market, workforce composition, skills and labour shortages, environmental challenges, and community engagement, and we have considered what is problematic about defining and understanding social value, what drives it, and why it is sometimes difficult to make a business case for social value. We have also discussed differing interpretations of value, the issues surrounding the assessment and measurement of social value together with the economics and politics of social value. By no means does this chapter aim to provide a comprehensive articulation of all the contextual issues, challenges, and opportunities related to social value; rather, we have sought to highlight selected important themes.

References AELP (2020) Thousands of SMEs denied chance to recruit apprentices as a result of levy shortage, latest AELP survey finds. Association of Employment and Learning Providers https://www.aelp.org.uk/news/news/press-releases/thousands-of-smesdenied-chance-to-recruit-apprentices-as-a-result-of-levy-shortage-latest-aelpsurvey-finds/ [accessed 19 April 2021]. Balliet, D., Parks, C. and Joireman, J. (2009) Social value orientation and cooperation in social dilemmas: A meta-analysis, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(4), 533–547. Boyle, L. and Michell, K. (2020) Key ingredients for a collaborative urban regeneration strategy in the Global South, Construction Economics and Building, 20(02), 150–164. Business and Sustainable Development Commission (2017) Better Business Better World, The report of the Business & Sustainable Development Commission, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=400& nr=2399&menu=1515 [accessed 1 May 2021]. CIOB (2009) Skills in the construction industry 2009, Ascot: Chartered Institute of Building. CIOB (2016) The impact of the ageing population on the construction industry, Ascot: Chartered Institute of Building.

36  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Close, R. and Loosemore, M. (2014) Breaking down the site hoardings: Attitudes and approaches to community consultation during construction. Construction Management and Economics, 32(7), 816–828. De Dreu, C.K.W. and Van Lange, P.A.M. (1995) The impact of social value orientations on negotiator cognition and behaviour. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(11), 1178–1188. Delizonna, L. (2017) High-performing teams need psychological safety. Here’s how to create it, Harvard Business Review, 24 August, https://hbr.org/2017/08/highperforming-teams-need-psychological-safety-heres-how-to-create-it [accessed 30 April 2021]. Eisenstein, C. (2019) Climate: A new story. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books. Emerson, J. (2000) The nature of returns: A social capital markets inquiry into elements of investment and the blended value proposition, Social Enterprise Series No 17, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Farmer (2016) The farmer review of the UK construction labour model. Modernise or die: Time to decide the industry’s future. London: Cast Consultancy. Fleming, J.S. (2005) Piaget, Kohlberg, Gilligan, and others on moral development, In Fleming, J.S. (Ed.) Psychological perspectives on human development, Prescott, AZ: Southwest Psychometrics and Psychology Resources, 153–177, http://swppr. org/Textbook/The_Book.pdf [accessed 27 April 2021]. Freeman, E., Harrison, J.S., Wicks, A.C., Parmar, B. and de Colle, S. (2010) Stakeholder theory: The state of the art, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Global ABC (2019) 2019 global status report for buildings and construction: Towards a zero-emission, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector. Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction, International Energy Agency and the United Nations Environment Programme, https://www.unenvironment.org/ resources/publication/2019-global-status-report-buildings-and- constructionsector [accessed 14 February 2021]. Griesinger, D.W. and Livingston, J.W. (1973) Toward a model of interpersonal motivation in experimental games. Behavioral Science, 18(3), 173–188. Griffith, A., Knight, A. and King, A. (2003) Best practice tendering for design and build projects, London: Thomas Telford. Grosch, K. and Rau, H. (2017) Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation, cege Discussion Papers, No. 308, University of Göttingen, Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research (cege), Göttingen. Guppy, L. and Anderson, K. (2017) Water crisis report. United Nations University Institute for Water, Hamilton: Environment and Health. Harari, Y.N. (2018) 21 lessons for the 21st century, London: Penguin Random House. Hawken, P. (2017) Drawdown: The most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse global warming, New York: Penguin Books. Kelley, H.H. and Stahelski, A.J. (1970) Social interaction basis of cooperators’ and competitors’ beliefs about others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 66–91. Kelley, H.H. and Thibault, J.W. (1978) Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence, New York: Wiley. Kelly, J., Male, S. and Graham, D. (2007) Value management in construction projects, Oxford: Blackwell. Lansley, S. (2015) Why tackling inequality is an economic imperative, https://www. socialeurope.eu/why-tackling-inequality-is-an-economic-imperative [accessed 4 June 2020].

The drivers, challenges, and opportunities   37 Levitt, T. (2020) BS 8950:2020 – Guide to enhancing social value, London: The British Standards Institution. Lin, L-W. (2019) Mandatory corporate social responsibility? Legislative innovation and judicial application in China, Oxford Business Law Blog, https://www. law.ox.ac.uk/business-law-blog/blog/2019/05/mandatory-corporate-socialresponsibility-legislative-innovation-and [accessed 3 May 2021]. Loosemore, M., Alkilani, S. and Mathenge, R. (2020) The risks of and barriers to social procurement in construction: A supply chain perspective. Construction Management and Economics, 38(6), 552–569. McClintock, C.G. and Allison, S.T. (1989) Social value orientation and helping behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19(4), 353–362. Messick, D.M. and McClintock, C.G. (1968) Motivational bases of choice in experimental games. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4, 1–25. OECD (2012) Environmental outlook to 2050: The consequences of inaction, Organisation for Economic and Co-operative Development, https://www.oecd.org/g20/ topics/energy-environment-green-growth/oecdenvironmentaloutlookto2050theconsequencesofinaction.htm [accessed 14 February 2021]. PWC (2017) Global construction 2030: A global forecast for the construction industry to 2030, https://www.pwc.com.tr/en/hizmetlerimiz/altyapi-yatirimlari/yayinlar/ pwc-global-construction-2030.html [accessed 3 May 2021]. Raiden, A.B., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (2019) Social value in construction, Abingdon: Taylor and Francis, ISBN: 978-1-13829-509-4 RICS (2019) An opportunity to diversify the workforce, https://www.rics.org/ uk/news-insight/latest-news/news-opinion/an-opportunity-to-diversify-theworkforce/ [accessed 3 May 2021]. RICS (2020a) Asia Pacific construction monitor, London: RICS, https://www. rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/knowledge/research/market-surveys/ apac--mena-construction/rics-picqs-asia-pacific-construction-monitor-q2-2020. pdf [accessed 31 March 2021]. RICS (2020b) Middle East & Africa Construction and Infrastructure Survey, London: RICS, https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/knowledge/research/ market-surveys/apac--mena-construction/mea-ci-q1-2020.pdf [accessed 31 March 2021] RICS and AACE (2020) US construction and infrastructure survey, New York: RICS, https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/knowledge/research/ market-surveys/us-q1-2020.pdf [accessed 31 March 2021]. Sherratt, F. (2020) Editorial: The ethical and social challenges of Construction 4.0, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Management, Procurement and Law, 173(4), 139–140. Social Enterprise UK (2019) Front and centre – Putting social value at the heart of inclusive growth, London: Social Enterprise UK. Social Mobility Commission (2020) Apprenticeships and social mobility fulfilling potential, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apprenticeships-andsocial-mobility-fulfilling-potential [accessed 10 April 2021]. Troje, D. (2020) Can I get some help down here? Inter-project support for creating social value through social procurement, In Scott, L. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 36th annual ARCOM conference, 7–8 September, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, online, 105–114, http://www.arcom. ­ ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/9755a6b76242377f23f9d1635be0a77d.pdf.

38  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Turner & Townsend (2019) International construction market survey 2019, https://www. turnerandtownsend.com/en/perspectives/international-construction- marketsurvey-2019/ [accessed 31 March 2021]. Van Lange, P.A.M. (1999) The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(2), 337–349. van Prooijen, J.-W., Ståhl, T., Eek, D. and van Lange, P.A.M. (2012) Injustice for all or just for me? Social value orientation predicts responses to own versus other’s procedures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(10), 1247–1258. Van Vugt, M., Van Lange, P.A.M. and Meertens, R.M. (1996) Commuting by car or public transportation? A social dilemma analysis of travel mode judgements. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26(3), 373–395. Watts, P. and Holme, L. (2003) Corporate social responsibility, Geneva: World Busines Council for Sustainable Development. Watts, G., Dainty, A. and Fernie, S. (2019) Measuring social value in UK construction, In Gorse, C. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 35th annual ARCOM conference, 2–4 September, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 54–63. United Nations (2019) World population prospects, https://population.un.org/wpp/ Download/Standard/Population/ [accessed 14 February 2021].

Section II

Co-creating social value

Having set out the current context for social value and the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the first section of this book, Section II focuses on discussing what considering, creating, and delivering social value look like within organisations. We draw on practical examples from a variety of contributions from practitioners involved in this work: contractors, clients, a developer, and a consultant. We first discuss stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders in Chapter 3. This is an essential aspect of social value good practice. In Chapter 4, we focus attention on one important stakeholder group in organisations: employees and workers. We discuss managing people and good practice in human resource management, which are the simplest ways to begin to embed social value into an organisation. In Chapter 5, we turn our spotlight onto apprenticeships, an oft-mentioned but arguably underexplored centrepiece of creating and evidencing social value. In Chapters 6 and 7, we discuss social procurement and circular business models, useful ways to extend the consideration, creation, and delivery of social value into the wider supply chain. We draw on examples from the UK, Lanzarote, and France to showcase developments in this increasingly important space. In Chapter 8, Kevin Osbon provides insight into how a consultant approaches social value, including consideration of the Strategic Social Value Framework used by Focus Consultants, an SME based in the Midlands, UK. This is followed in Chapter 9 by a client’s perspective on social value. We draw on the experiences of South Yorkshire Housing Association, in Sheffield, UK as well as Alt-Erlaa housing estate in Vienna, Austria. In Chapter 10, James Willcox leads us through a contractor’s perspective, focused on Willmott Dixon’s considerable experience of social value. We invite you to reflect upon these diverse perspectives on social value and consider how your professional practice relates to the SDGs. We hope that the many different contributions in this book offer an insight into the collective potential to achieve significant advances in social value and the SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-4

3

Stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders Ani Raiden and Andrew King

In this chapter, we discuss stakeholder theory and explain how it can be employed to consider, create, and deliver social value. We outline the foundations of stakeholder analysis and relationship management and show the connection to social value through examples and links to case study details elsewhere in the book. We structure the discussion to focus on six different aspects to stakeholder management: identify stakeholders, categorise the stakeholders, develop a stakeholder matrix, undertake stakeholder mapping, maintain and manage the relationship, and continuous review and evaluation.

Stakeholder theory Stakeholder theory suggests that productively managing relationships with stakeholders who affect, and are affected by, an organisation’s activities is central to value creation (Freeman et al., 2010). The theory has become a key consideration in business ethics, and it has also been influential in shaping and refining understanding of corporate social responsibility, and now stands as Principle 1 within the Seven Principles of Social Value (Social Value UK, 2020). According to the stakeholder theory, understanding business is essentially about understanding the interactions within a network of relationships between different people and groups and how they help or hinder value creation. While in the past stakeholders may have been seen as a problem to ‘get past’, throughout this book, we demonstrate the benefits of analysing and actively managing relationships with different stakeholders via a variety of examples. We highlight how apprentices can be involved in organisational learning and development (Chapter 5) and how a client can involve end users (local residents) in project design (Chapter 9) to highlight just two exemplars. For now, we turn to explaining the processes involved in stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders. Essentially, stakeholder management is an ongoing process that involves the following six aspects: identify stakeholders, categorise the stakeholders,

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-5

42  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Figure 3.1 Stages in stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders.

develop a stakeholder matrix, undertake stakeholder mapping, and then focus on maintaining and managing the relationship, while continually reviewing and evaluating the information and relationships. If this is your first time thinking about, or doing, stakeholder analysis, you may wish to proceed through the process in a linear fashion, one step at a time (see Figure 3.1). If you already have experience of managing stakeholder information and relationships, then the tools we present below may help you deepen your approach and better understand how to best manage the relationships.

Identify stakeholders An important first step in stakeholder analysis is to identify the stakeholders relevant to an organisation or a project. This is set out as a high priority in the ISO 26000 guidance for social responsibility and features as an integral part of assessing and measuring social value (see Chapters 14 and 15). The first output of identifying the relevant stakeholders might look like a relatively simple list of the internal and external, primary and secondary, stakeholders as shown in Table 3.1. Note, however, that a stakeholder can be defined in a number of ways (Freeman et al., 2010):

Stakeholder analysis  43 Table 3.1 Identifying relevant stakeholders – a simple example list of the internal and external, primary and secondary stakeholders for a construction contractor

Internal

Primary

Secondary

•

• •

Freelance workers Agency workers

• • • • • •

Competitors Government Special interest groups Professional bodies Trade Unions Potential future

•

Media

• External

• • • • • •

Employees (it may be useful to break this down into relevant groups, for example, by organisational unit, or by contribution: managers, professional/specialist staff, operatives) Owners/shareholders (for private organisations) Client/customers End users Communities Suppliers Consultants Financiers

Legal definition:

Narrow definition: Strategic view:

Broad definition:

employees

A narrow list of only those individuals, groups, and organisations that a firm has legal duties for, or a contractual relationship with, for example, a contract of employment or a contract for services. Those groups without whose support the business would not be viable. These are often primary stakeholders. This view stresses what is good for the firm, seeking to identify stakeholders who are beneficial to its operations. It may include primary and secondary stakeholders. Any individual, group, or organisation that can affect, or is affected by, the organisation or its activities. This includes the secondary stakeholders.

It is important to remember that stakeholder analysis is a dynamic process and hence such lists ought to be ‘live’. As such, documents need to be continually reviewed and updated when changes occur in the internal workings of an organisation (for example, when there are structural changes or new projects are planned or initiated) or in the external environment. Many tools and documents can help with this ongoing activity of identifying relevant stakeholders, as shown in Figure 3.2. In the context of considering, creating, and delivering social value, Wyatt et al. (2019) highlight that the groups of people and organisations who have affected the organisation/activity (or will do), and those that have been

44  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Figure 3.2 Tools and documents for identifying stakeholders.

affected by the activity (or will be affected by it) are most important. They also recommend involving stakeholders in discussions about stakeholder analysis (and specifically the impact you are likely to identify) to enable the resulting lists to be refined. As such, it is important to include all relevant stakeholders and possibly identify new stakeholder groups (people or organisations that you didn’t realise you influenced), and segments (or sub-groups) within your stakeholder groups (emerging due to differences in the outcomes experienced or the value/relative importance placed upon outcomes). The ISO 26000 (clause 5.3.2) suggests that an organisation should ask the following questions in identifying stakeholders: • • • • • • • •

To whom does the organisation have legal obligations? Who might be positively or negatively affected by the organisation’s decisions or activities? Who is likely to express concerns about the decisions and activities of the organisation? Who has been involved in the past when similar concerns needed to be addressed? Who can help the organisation address specific impacts? Who can affect the organisation’s ability to meet its responsibilities? Who would be disadvantaged if excluded from the engagement? Who in the value chain is affected?

As a starting point, we offer a list of some of the important stakeholders for social value in practice in Table 3.2.

Stakeholder analysis  45 Table 3.2 Some of the important stakeholders to involve in considering, creating, and delivering social value in practice

Internal External

Primary

Secondary

• • • • •

•

Placement students, interns, pupils on work placement*

• • • • • • • •

FE and HE providers Students in FE and HE* School pupils* Government Special interest groups Professional bodies Competitors Media

• • • • • • *

Employees and workers* Apprentices* Managers* Local community* Potential future employees and workers* Local authorities End users* General public* (especially in placemaking) Client Social Enterprises and Social Businesses Local sub-contractors and suppliers

Especially those in the vulnerable, disadvantaged, or minority groups.

Categorise the stakeholders Once a list/lists of stakeholders is identified, categorising the stakeholders is a helpful step towards understanding the interactions and behaviours of specific stakeholders. This will also help in determining managerial actions necessary for managing the relationships with different stakeholders. Table 3.3 presents a simple two-by-two model of thinking about categorising stakeholders in primary/secondary and internal/external terms. Another way might be to identify: • • • •

Stakeholders relevant to governance (board, regulators, auditors, steering groups) Providers (partners, suppliers) Users/beneficiaries (employees, client/customers, community) Influencers (media, trade unions, local interest groups).

Mitchell et al. (1997) argue that stakeholders can be identified and categorised on the basis that they should have one of the following: 1 2 3

Power to influence the firm A legitimate relationship with the firm An urgency of claim on the firm.

46  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Sources of power can arise within organisations internally and/or externally. Internal sources of power include organisational hierarchy (formal power: decision making), influence and connections (informal power: charisma, leadership), control of strategic resources or environment (negotiating skills), or involvement in strategy implementation. External sources of power may include control over resources (materials, labour, money), involvement with project/organisation partners (suppliers, agents), or possession of knowledge (skills, sub-contractors). Identification of the legitimacy of a relationship is rather more ‘imprecise and difficult to operationalize’ (Mitchell et al., 1997). It refers to socially accepted and expected structures or behaviours, the general perception or assumption that the actions of an individual, or a group, or an organisation are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions. There are some easy examples, for example, those derived by taking the legal view (for example, stakeholders because of contractual relationship), but especially when considering social value, we should not be restricted to that view only. Sometimes, a legitimate relationship is closely tied to power: for example, ‘minority shareholders’ have a legitimate relationship with a private sector company, but very little, if any, power over the firm. An urgency of claim on the firm calls for immediate attention. It indicates that a relationship with a particular stakeholder is a pressing matter, an imperative for action. Mitchell et al. (1997) highlight that this only exists only when two conditions are met: Time sensitivity – the degree to which managerial delay in attending to the claim or relationship is unacceptable to the stakeholder, and Criticality – the importance of the claim or the relationship to the stakeholder. On the basis of identifying and analysing the nature of the relationship any specific stakeholder has with an organisation according to the power/ legitimacy/urgency they have, Mitchell et al. (1997) suggest that stakeholders can be organised into three main classes: latent stakeholders, expectant stakeholders, and definitive stakeholders, and a further six sub-classes, as shown in Table 3.3. Table 3.3 Classes of stakeholder (after Mitchell et al., 1997) Latent stakeholders

Expectant stakeholders

Definitive stakeholders

Dormant (power only) Discretionary (legitimacy only) Demanding (urgency only)

Dominant (power and legitimacy) Dangerous (power and urgency) Dependent (legitimacy and urgency)

Definitive (power, legitimacy, and urgency)

Stakeholder analysis  47 A City Council planning department is a good example of a definitive stakeholder for a construction project. They have the power to influence the firm’s operations in granting permission to build, or not, within the city boundary, a legitimate relationship with the firm because of their role within the societal structure for controlling the development of the built environment, and an urgency of claim: timely and critical overseeing that the project is constructed to approved plans. They also have high interest in achieving positive social and environmental impact and may offer a useful knowledge resource and drive to support the project, where social value is integral to their business model. Importantly, classification of stakeholders with regard to business interest and social value may not always align neatly. For example, in Table  3.2, we identify apprentices as primary internal stakeholders in considering, creating, and delivering social value. Since their role is likely to have a significant influence on the social value an organisation is able to clearly demonstrate, and they have a legitimate relationship with their employer, they fall within the expectant-dependent stakeholder class in relation to creating and delivering social value. However, in terms of a business-focused analysis, an apprentice is more likely to fall within the latent-discretionary class. Thus, when considering social value, an organisation or project stakeholder analysis should not be too closely focused on the business priorities. It is useful to consider it a separate task. A reconciliation of the relevant stakeholders for the business generally, and social value specifically, can be carried out once the two analyses have been undertaken independently. Where an organisation/project team wishes to develop an in-depth understanding of the interactions that are necessary with specific stakeholders, they may wish to compile a stakeholder matrix in addition to classifying the stakeholders.

Stakeholder matrix The stakeholder matrix usually consists of a table that includes important information about different stakeholders in an easily accessible summary form. The matrix may include information about: Relationship – the nature relationship with the firm (for example, a client, supplier, employee), or more specific details such as the role within the organisation Interest & Expectations – interests are usually simply indicated on a low-medium-high scale, and expectations can be summarised in few words where this is relevant Influence – this is usually simply indicated on a low-medium-high scale Key information – for example, any unique facts, traits, preferences, or behavioural characteristics Class – categorising the stakeholders (for example, after Mitchell et al., 1997)

48  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Ways to manage – brief notes about what is important for managing the relationship, for example, details about communication preferences, the activities to be invited/included in; can be linked to stakeholder mapping (see below). Such matrices may sometimes be focused on specific stakeholders, for example, the definite and expectant groups of stakeholders. In the example above, this would include the consultant, client, contractor, architect, and planning department as the definitive stakeholders, and sub-contractors and trainees as dependent stakeholders. While these are the key players in project delivery, such analysis would exclude potentially high social value groups, such as local residents. Alternatively, an analysis may focus on a particular stakeholder group, such as employees, when there is a need to put together a new site team. Again, this is helpful from a project perspective, but will omit important social value considerations. Thus, as the classification of stakeholders with regard to business interest and social value may not always align neatly, it is important to be clear about which specific stakeholders relate to managing the project (KPIs) and explicitly communicate the social value-relevant stakeholders. Table 3.4 shows that local residents are potentially a high social value stakeholder group, depending on their interest and influence. It is important to review the matrix data periodically, since stakeholders’ perspectives, interests, and involvement will change over time.

Stakeholder mapping A useful summary document may be presented in the form of a stakeholder map where the different stakeholders are presented in four quadrants according to, for example, the level of power and interest, as shown in Figure 3.3. The relevant stakeholders for each quadrant may be listed to remind managers of key relationships and actions. A more nuanced plotting of the stakeholder on the two-by-two grid is of course possible, but most importantly, stakeholder mapping should not be seen as the ‘end product’. Rather, it needs to be continually reviewed and evaluated as the relationships with different stakeholders evolve.

Maintaining and managing the relationship, and continuous review and evaluation Central elements to effective maintaining and managing relationships with stakeholders are: Co-operative approach, trust, and communication. There are many different models of stakeholder management, but commonly they present six, seven, or ten principles of stakeholder management.

Stakeholder analysis  49 Table 3.4  An example of a stakeholder matrix for a construction project and social value Stakeholder Relationship Employees (Ch 4, 5) Apprentice (Ch 5) University (Ch 5)

Suppliers (Ch 6, 7)

Interest & expectations

Influence Key on project information

Class

Professional& Varied: operative Meaningful work & pay Trainee Varied: Training & employment Higher High: Education Good quality programme training and provider employment

Low-med

Potentially med-high social value High social value

Discretionary Keep informed

Discretionary Keep informed

Subcontractor

Low-med

Potentially high social value, depending on partnership Local business, SME employs an apprentice, high social value Knowledge resource, drive, social value integral to business model Drive, social value integral to business model

Varied: Timely work & pay

Low-med Low

Focus (Ch 8) Consultant

High: High Social, environmental & economic impact

South Yorkshire Housing Association (Ch 9) Willmott Dixon (Ch 10)

Client

High: High Social, environmental & economic impact High: High Social, environmental & economic impact

GlassHouse (Ch 11)

Charity

Architect (Ch 12)

Consultant for the client

Contractor

City Council Planning (Ch 13) dept

Local residents (Ch 9, 12, 13)

End users

High: Low-med Social & environmental impact

Dependent

Keep informed

Dependent

Keep informed, consult

Definitive

Key player: engage with actively

Definitive

Key player: engage with actively Key player: engage with actively

Drive, social Definitive value integral to business model

Knowledge & drive, social value integral to business model High: Med-high Knowledge & Social, drive, social environmental value integral & economic to business impact model High: High Resources, Social & drive, social environmental value integral impact to business model Varied: High in Potentially Voice, wellour cases, high social being, generally value, drive quality living low-med environment

Ways to manage

Demanding Minimal (or effort, discretionary) consult in design Definitive

Key player: engage with actively Definitive Key player: engage with actively Discretionary Keep or informed, demanding consult in (sometimes design dependent or definitive)

50  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Key players:

Financiers

Consultants

Level of Power

Keep satisfied:

Client Contractor Architect Council planning dept

Minimal effort:

Keep informed:

Competitors

Apprentices

Charity

University

Media

Employees Suppliers Local residents Level of Interest

Figure 3.3  An example of stakeholder mapping.

We show two such models in Figure 3.4: the Clarkson principles of stakeholder management (Carroll et al., 2017), and the ten key principles of stakeholder engagement by the Association for Project Management (2020). These principles are intended to provide managers with guidelines and action words that reflect the kind of co-operative spirit that is useful for managing stakeholder relationships. Continuous review and evaluation of all aspects of stakeholder analysis and stakeholder management is necessary, including consideration of: • • • • • •

Project, programme, and/or organisation activities and needs Who the key stakeholders for the project, programme, and/or organisation are How they may be usefully categorised Stakeholder matrix Stakeholder mapping The principles of stakeholder management and engagement.

This may form part of a periodic project/programme review schedule alongside ad hoc evaluation and adjustment deemed necessary as situations and relationships evolve over time. We have highlighted throughout that working with stakeholders is a dynamic process and the models and tools presented in this chapter should

Stakeholder analysis  51

The Clarkson principles

The Association of Project Management 10 key principles of stakeholder engagement

Acknowledge

Communicate

Monitor

Consult, early and often

Listen

Remember, they are only human

Communicate

Plan it

Adopt

Relationships are key

Recognize

Simple, but not easy

Work

Just part of managing risk

Avoid

Compromise

Acknolwdge potential conflicts

Understand what success is Take responsibility

Figure 3.4 Principles of stakeholder management.

not be seen as static outputs that one may achieve as a result of stakeholder analysis; they are ever-changing guides that direct action. For further information, see Association for Project Management: https://www.apm.org.uk/resources/find-a-resource/stakeholder-engagement/ key-principles/ Chinyio, E. and Olomolaiye, P. (2010) Construction stakeholder management, Chichester: Wiley. Carroll, A.B., Brown, J.A. and Buchholtz, A.K. (2017) Business & society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management (10th ed.), Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Chapter summary In this chapter, we have discussed stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders in relation to social value. We structured the discussion with a focus on six different aspects to stakeholder management: identify stakeholders, categorise the stakeholders, develop a stakeholder matrix, undertake stakeholder mapping, maintain and manage the relationship, and continuous review and evaluation. Stakeholder analysis and carefully managing relationships with stakeholders are central to achieving many SDGs, and in particular, in the spirit of SDG 17 Partnerships for the goals.

52  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

References Association for Project Management (2020) 10 key principles of stakeholder engagement, https://www.apm.org.uk/resources/find-a-resource/stakeholder-engagement/ key-principles/ [accessed 12 March 2021]. Carroll, A.B., Brown, J.A. and Buchholtz, A.K. (2017) Business & society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management (10th ed.), Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Freeman, E., Harrison, J.S., Wicks, A.C., Parmar, B. and de Colle, S. (2010) Stakeholder theory: The state of the art, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. and Wood, D.J. (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts, The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. Social Value UK (2020) What are the principles of social value? Liverpool: Social Value UK, http://www.socialvalueuk.org/what-is-socialvalue/theprinciples-ofsocial-value/ [accessed 21 December 2020]. Wyatt, J., Adams, T., Bichard, E., Boiardi, P., Cain, R., Carpenter, B., Ebrahim, A., Faivel, S., Freeman, A., Goodspeed, T., Inglis, J., Jefford, S., Kempton, O., Olsen, S., Robertson, S. and Wang, L. (2019) Standard on applying Principle 1: Involve stakeholders (Version 2.0), Liverpool: Social Value International, http://www. socialvalueuk.org/app/uploads/2019/06/Standard-on-Stakeholder-Involvement­ V2.0-FINAL-1.pdf [accessed 27 November 2020].

4

Managing people and considering, creating, and delivering social value Ani Raiden and Andrew King

In this chapter, we discuss ways of considering, delivering, and creating social value internally within organisations through good practice in managing people. People, both directly employed staff and contracted workers, are central stakeholders in any business. Human Resource (HR) management strategy, policy, and practice form part of our discussion in this chapter, but importantly, wider, everyday people-focused management and decision-making is central to social value. Enhancing the opportunities and conditions relating to employment is one of the simplest ways for organisations to

• • • •

• • •

Health and safety: PPE, Covid-secure workplace, presenteeism Mental health and well-being Financial well-being Managing remote workers

•

Equality, diversity, and inclusion Women, families with caring responsibilities Positive action: recruitment and selection, flexible working, training and development Equal pay

• • • • •

Employment opportunities, contracts for services Conditions of employment for employees and workers Training and development Equal pay Employment relations

• • • •

Sex, gender, LGBT+, disability, age, race Intersectionality Equality, diversity, and inclusion Positive action: recruitment and selection, training and development

Figure 4.1 Managing people, social value, and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-6

54  Ani Raiden and Andrew King consider, create, and deliver social value. Our discussion addresses a range of SDGs, specifically 3 Good health and well-being, 5 Gender equality, 8 Decent work and economic growth, and 10 Reduced inequalities.

One of the central aims of many social value initiates is to enhance the opportunities and conditions relating to employment. For example: • • • • • • • •

Full-time and part-time employment Self-employment Government Training Schemes Secure jobs Apprenticeships Vocational training Volunteering Employment training.

There are many explicit and implicit benefits offered by employment. To an individual, the benefits may include direct value in exchange, for example, pay in return for labour and knowledge, or breaking cycles of un-employment or under-employment. They may also benefit from subjective value in use or esteem value, such as developing a sense of purpose, sense of self-worth and dignity, self-esteem, sense of belonging, feelings of security, and social cohesion. The benefits for organisations and communities are also many and varied. For organisations, social value initiatives often translate into an opportunity to access and develop wider pool of potential talent, and the potential to enhance diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Societally, in terms of direct value in exchange, there is commonly less reliance on welfare and healthcare systems and more tax income. Indirectly, there are fewer social issues (for example, antisocial behaviour) and less apathy, and therefore more participation in civil society when people feel that they have an opportunity to make a contribution.

Senior management support and leadership Most crucially, considering, creating, and delivering social value within organisations require senior management support and leadership. There are many wonderful examples of ad hoc, localised, and bottom-up initiatives that make a difference, and these may form part of the organisational offering over time, as we show in Chapter 10. Strategic, organisation-level commitment to effective people management ensures that the consideration of people forms part of the strategic decision-making agenda and that the potential for change can be realised. However, where they have not previously thought about the social value of managing people within the organisation, it requires them to invest in the process. Initiating and managing the processes of crafting and implementing relevant policy require communication, swift decision-making, removing barriers, and managing resistance. Even ‘change for the better’ can be met with resistance, disbelief, and

Managing people  55 ridicule, before the benefits are acknowledged and taken-for-granted. This can take a long time and the important role that senior managers play as change agents cannot be underplayed. Their working timeframe is often longer-term (looking beyond projects or programmes of work) and they have a holistic view of the business and considerable power and influence over the organisation. That said, senior managers are only one stakeholder group that are relevant to social value; hence, we advocate stakeholder analysis (see Chapter 3) as a useful starting point for any social value initiative, be it bottom-up or top-down. Managing people within organisations can be tricky and unpredictable, for example, because of the differences in peoples’ perceptions and social value orientation (see Chapter 2). Senior management leadership is required for establishing the value-base, culture, environment, and systems for relevant strategy, policy, and practices. Fujiwara and Dass (2020) suggest that creating a social value strategy involves four steps: 1 2 3 4

Understand social value Establish local needs and understand the context Establish social value outcomes and metrics Implementing and sustaining success over the long-term.

We discuss different tools and models that help and support this kind of strategy work in Chapter 15. For now, we turn to two broad categories of activity and decision-making that relate to managing people in organisations that are central to considering, creating, and delivering social value in the built environment: • •

Contracts of employment Conditions of employment.

Contracts of employment and contracts for services: employees, workers, and the self-employed Contracts of employment and contracts for services refer to the contractual arrangements that are agreed or typical to the sector or industry, with regard to the legal status of a person undertaking work in the premises of an organisation. Commonly, in construction, people are either (i) employees, with a contract of employment, (ii) workers, with a contract to do work or provide services for a reward, or (iii) self-employed, running and taking responsibility for the success of their own businesses. The different classifications bestow important differences in individual rights, for example, in whether they earn holiday pay, parental leave, or sick pay as shown in Table 4.1. In the UK, employees and workers have the right not to be discriminated against and the right to be paid the national minimum wage. All employees, workers, and the self-employed have protection for

56  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Table 4.1 An illustration of the differences in employment rights and protection in the UK (ACAS, 2021) Employees

Workers

Self-employed

• •

• •

• •

• • • • •

Health and safety Right not to be discriminated against Right to be paid national minimum wage Holiday pay Parental leave and pay Sick pay Ability to claim redundancy and unfair dismissal after two years’ service

• •

Health and safety Right not to be discriminated against Right to be paid national minimum wage Holiday pay

Health and safety Protection against discrimination (in some cases)

their health and safety on client’s and/or contractor’s premises. Internationally, such protection varies. We discuss discrimination protection later in this chapter. Contracting organisations are often described as ‘hollowed-out’ firms (see, for example, Green, 2011; Dainty and Loosemore, 2012) as they tend to employ a skeleton of managerial and professional staff as employees, and contract out much of the work to subcontractors and the self-employed throughout the wider supply chain. This is a strategy for outsourcing the contractual responsibilities attached to direct employment, for example, in relation to managing fluctuations in supply and demand and related risks. The model reflects Atkinson’s widely debated ‘flexible firm’ (1984: 29) which set out a tiered approach to engaging an organisation’s workforce with flexibility to adjust to market conditions. At the centre of the flexible firm sits a core group that consists of important members in the primary labour market. In the hollowed-out contracting firm, the managerial and professional employees constitute the core group who tend to only exercise functional flexibility, meaning that their jobs are more secure even when market conditions take a downturn. Their positions are protected by the first and second peripheral groups, whom both offer numerical flexibility in staffing. These groups include staff and workers within the secondary labour markets. They are valuable to the organisation, and the use of short-term contracts is quite common to allow for the flexibility to let staff go, should demand reduce. The outermost tier includes the self-employed, subcontractors, agency workers, and other forms of outsourcing. These workers often bring in specialist skills and services on demand basis. Given the prevalence of self-employment and subcontracting in the built environment, procurement is another major area for considering, creating, and delivering social value, which we discuss in Chapters 6 and 7.

Managing people  57

Figure 4.2 The flexible firm.

An important consideration with regard to social value and the contract of employment is an opportunity to reflect upon how an organisation chooses to support and engage people. Decisions must be made on principles and values. In addition to considerations of flexibility, as noted above, in employment relations terms these decisions are often framed in two ways: • How to best maintain co-operation and commitment (or control) people? • How to provide good work and meaningful jobs at feasible cost? These are not mutually exclusive categories, or the opposite ends of a continuum, but rather parallel decisions, which often impact upon an organisation’s ability to attract and retain people, and to become an ‘employer of choice’.

Given that employees have the greatest rights and protection, an organisation that chooses to employ, and not contract, workers will be sending out important signals about their commitment to people. Where direct employment is not possible, for example, because of fluctuating workloads, then setting out contracts for work or services with rights and protection similar to those offered for employees demonstrates the organisation’s intent to work beyond compliance with the minimum legal requirements (see Chapter 2 for a discussion about the different drivers for social value).

58  Ani Raiden and Andrew King An employer of choice is recognised as an organisation that strives to provide employees (and workers) compensation and benefits above market rates. They are fair and seek to offer job security and opportunities for growth, show respect and commitment, and empower and involve people in the organisation as well as their work.

Conditions of employment Conditions of employment refer to the rules and procedures that employees must abide by as part of their contract, and they also specify how an organisation promises to manage matters relating to employment, work, and social value. Conditions of employment are communicated and put into practice through a wide variety of policy and procedures that convey to people the formal organisational structures, guidelines, support, and expectations. This may include policies and activities in the following areas: •

Human resource planning: strategic and critical reflection about the composition of the workforce, local and global demographics, and societal trends

•

Recruitment and selection • Consider ‘employer brand’ and the positive implications of being seen as an employer of choice • Consider widening talent pools • Take positive action, for example, targeted recruitment advertising, and/or make sure that migrant workers and minority groups have the necessary support • Explicit signal commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion in recruitment advertising and on company websites • Ensure fairness in selection criterion and processes: provide training and development opportunities for decision-makers, for example, on unconscious bias • Induction training

•

Training, development, performance management, and careers • Learning and development, talent management, performance management, and careers, perhaps, including the payment of professional fees • Personal and professional development planning and review • Skills: upskilling, supporting the development of new skills • Behaviour, for example, communication, managing conflict, work-life balance, time management, resilience, patience, selfimprovement

Managing people  59 •

Rewards: pay and benefits • Equal pay, national minimum wage, and living wage • Migrant workers • Benefits (financial and non-financial)

•

Health, safety, and well-being • • • • • •

•

PPE Covid-secure workplace Mental health and well-being Managing absence and presenteeism Managing remote workers Financial well-being

Employment relations • Disciplinary and grievance policies • Holidays, secondment, volunteering, time off, and leave for trade union activities • Communication, employee voice and involvement, empowerment • Alcohol and drug use, and organisational support • Corporate responsibility, anti-bribery, modern slavery • Emerging technology and new ways of working

•

Flexible working • Work-life balance, flex-time and flex-locations, working from home • Tailored support for carers, especially those who have circumstances and dependents that are challenging (for example, children with additional or special needs, foster carers, adopted children, and eldercare) • Use of social networking

•

Parental leave, including maternity, paternity, and adoption leave, and support for foster carers, and support with childcare (for example, childcare vouchers or subsidised childcare)

•

Ending employment and exit from the organisation • Voluntary resignation, dismissal, retirement • Redundancy, including information on the length of notice periods and the nature of redundancy consultations

•

•

Managing equality, diversity, and inclusion: Good practice suggests that an overarching equality and diversity policy should expressly inform the organisation’s vision and values, and the issue might then also be incorporated into many other policies, for example, recruitment and selection and reward Partnering arrangements, for example, joint ventures, outsourcing, strategic alliances, and public-private sector commissioning models and frameworks (CIPD, 2021a).

60  Ani Raiden and Andrew King We believe that social value and managing people are contextual and contingent upon the specific circumstances of an organisation, and thus we advocate bespoke development of policy and procedures (instead of looking at what others’ have done, or trying to replicate ‘best practice’ examples). HR policies are there to provide generic and practical advice and guidance for managers and staff on a range of work-related issues, and the relevant HR procedures are there to supplement the policies by giving a step-by-step account of specific arrangements that apply in particular circumstances (for example, setting time limits within which meetings must take place). CIPD Factsheets are a useful and free-to-access source of professional guidance on HR policy. They offer suggestions for what could be included in a particular policy (see https://www.cipd.co.uk/search?q=factsheets). Further information is also available in the recent Taylor review on ‘good work’: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/good-work-the-taylorreview-of-modern-working-practices Many aspects of HR practice are well placed to help achieve a variety of the SDGs. The SDG 3 Good health and well-being is generally relevant to managing people, and target 3.5, to strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol, is one specific aspect covered under HR management. In terms of the SDG 5 gender equality, target 5.4, to recognise and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies, and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate, can be achieved via sophisticated flexible working practices. Social value-aligned training and development, and pay and benefits policies and practices, can help achieve SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth, and specifically target 8.2, to achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading, and innovation, including through a focus on high-value added and labour-intensive sectors. Generation of opportunities for employment and self-employment supports the achievement of target 8.3, to promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalisation and growth of micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises. Managing diversity and inclusion policy and practice, in turn, works towards target 8.5, to achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value. Modern slavery is related to target 8.7, to take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour and end modern slavery and human

Managing people  61 trafficking. Health, safety, and well-being aim to protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and those in precarious employment (target 8.8). In terms of the SDG 10 Reduced inequalities, recruitment and selection policy and practices can help achieve target 10.7, to facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, and pay and benefits policy and practice can help progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40% of the population at a rate higher than the national average (target 10.1). We will now focus on equality, diversity, and inclusion, and demonstrate the crucial and urgent part they play in considering, delivering, and creating social value in the built environment. They offer an opportunity to transform how people view the sector in general, and more specifically how they view employment within the sector.

Managing equality, diversity, and inclusion In Chapter 2, we discuss how legal compliance and the business case are often key drivers for social value. They are also the key drivers for considering equality, diversity, and inclusion. Terminology in this area is often confusing, and we hope to offer clarity by conceptually separating ‘equality’ and ‘managing diversity and inclusion’. We will first discuss equality of opportunity. Equality of opportunity – the legal case ‘Equality of opportunity’ or ‘equal opportunities’ usually refers to the societal response to inequalities in society and in labour markets. They are fundamentally about law and protecting groups of people with the aim of creating fairness. Groups of people are defined by ‘protected characteristics’, which are embodied in slowly evolving and varied international legislation as shown in Table 4.2. The idea is to offer protection from direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, and in many places, harassment and victimisation, for people who have one, or more, of the protected characteristics. Direct discrimination refers to making decisions based on criteria that are not relevant to the situation (for example, characteristics of a person, such as age or sex, instead of job competence in recruitment and selection decision-making). Indirect discrimination is less explicit, and occurs, for example, when a job advert includes a requirement for a certain length of work experience that unreasonably prevents people from specific age groups from applying (indirect age discrimination) or when a characteristic that disadvantages a specific group of people is used as selection criteria. For example, a person’s height has been found to be indirectly discriminating

62  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Table 4.2 Protected characteristics in equality legislation in the UK, Sweden, Ghana, and Brazil Country

Protected characteristics

UK

Age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, sex, and sexual orientation Age, disability, ethnicity, religion or other belief, sex, sexual orientation, and transgender identity or expression Colour, creed, ethnic origin, gender, political opinion, race, religion, sex, social or economic status, workers with disabilities, working women, and young people Age, citizenship, colour, disability, marital status, national origin, political affiliation, pregnancy, race, religion, and sex

Sweden Ghana Brazil

on the basis of ethnic origin. Indirect discrimination can also apply to the working environment and/or facilities, for example, when men and women have not been accommodated equally (indirect sex discrimination). Harassment occurs when someone behaves in a way that offends or makes another person feel distressed or intimidated; people cannot be treated in a way that violates their dignity, or creates a hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. Victimisation refers to unfair treatment of a person who is taking action under equality of opportunity legislation (like making a complaint of discrimination) or someone who is supporting another person to do so. For further information, see The Equality Act: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-andguidance/your-rights-under-equality-act-2010 Human rights: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/what-are-humanrights/international-human-rights The compliance approach to equality of opportunity seeks to ensure that everyone has the same opportunities for gaining access to a range of factors, for example, employment, training, promotional opportunities, and equal pay as well as ensuring that there is no unfair treatment of any group of employees on the grounds of the protected characteristics. Many organisations have policies in place which may be supported by providing training for managers in decision-making positions, together with monitoring of the number of employees who have the protected characteristics. This compliance approach works in the spirit of SDG 10 Reduced inequalities, target 10.3, to ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices, and promoting appropriate legislation, policies, and action in this regard. It also aligns well with SDG 5 Gender equality, target 5.c, to adopt and

Managing people  63 strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality, and the empowerment of all women and girls at all levels. It is rare, however, that this approach leads to proactive managing of ‘equality, diversity and inclusion’ in the workplace; rather more commonly, the emphasis is on employees (or potential candidates for employment in the case of selection decision-making) challenging organisational practice to pursue investigation and development. Managing diversity and inclusion – the business case ‘Managing diversity and inclusion’ in the workplace is a broader concept that is about a company’s philosophy, value-base, and the business case. As such, it tends to go further than the law and relates to the specific individual circumstances of people, such as class and educational background, rather than the protected characteristics of a group (like age or gender). Emphasis here is on harnessing difference for business benefit. Specific actions an organisation can take include (but are not limited to): • • •

Clearly communicating senior and line management support, and leading by example Formal policy and procedures Inclusive climate where unique contributions are valued, and individual differences celebrated • Showcasing talent beyond job specific requirements, sharing stories of achievements • A view whereby, for example, neurodiversity is seen as a unique ability (and not a disability) • Observing a calendar of festivals and events important to members of staff • Visible symbols of support, for example, rainbow and/or baby blue and pink and white lanyards

•

Diversity training • To create and maintain an inclusive climate • Raising awareness of other cultures and beliefs • Addressing bias and stereotyping (many are currently focusing on unconscious bias) • Increasing skills and introducing changes in behaviour, for example, in recruitment and selection decision-making • Changing attitude and emotional outcomes, for example, positive action to increase self-efficacy (self-belief in ability to succeed) or assertiveness training • Preparing for and supporting allies in their role

64  Ani Raiden and Andrew King •

Workplace accommodation and reasonable adjustments • Provision of specialist software, hardware, and/or tools • Adjustments to workspace, facilities, and/or buildings • Adjustments to work schedule, working hours, and/or work role and tasks • Counselling

• •

Employee groups and special interest groups Keeping an up-to-date register of allies, for example, for lesbian, gay, transgender/transsexual, asexual, intersex, queer, questioning to name few (LGBT+).

Staff training is an important element of raising awareness, eradicating discrimination, harassment, and victimisation in the workplace, and creating an inclusive climate. In the UK, the CITB has developed a bespoke training package for construction-based employers (see below). CITB be FaIR framework The CITB Be FaIR framework is a training package intended to provide construction-based employers with a structured approach to develop and embed fairness, inclusion, and respect in their organisations. The five core training modules address leadership, recruitment, management, monitoring, training, and procurement, and aim to deliver the following benefits: increasing productivity through improved staff engagement and loyalty • • •

Reducing the likelihood that the trained staff you’ve invested in move to a competitor Cutting the costs of having to replace and train staff Winning work by highlighting that you value good employees who produce a high standard of work.

For further information, see https://www.citb.co.uk/standards-and-delivering-training/be-fairframework/what-is-the-be-fair-framework/ Positive action and affirmative action Social value initiatives often seek to level the playing field, for example, by focusing efforts to support a particular group of people or working to quotas

Managing people  65 in recruiting new candidates. When an employer takes steps to help or encourage certain groups of people who are disadvantaged in some way, or have different needs with regard to accessing work or training, it is called ‘positive action’ or ‘affirmative action’. Positive action is the term commonly used within European countries. Affirmative action tends to be used in other countries. Positive action and affirmative action are contested terms. There are clear benefits to the minority groups whose position in the labour market is enhanced by such social value initiatives (for example, greater opportunities for employment, decent working conditions, and access to training). Yet, often simply because of confusion and inconsistency relating to the terminology, and lack of information about the nature and purpose of positive/affirmative action, such initiatives are viewed in a negative light. Also, it is important to recognise that sometimes members of the majority group feel threatened by the attention and targeted extra efforts that are afforded to minority groups by positive action programmes. Transparent, clear, and sensitive communications may be fruitful in gaining their support. More importantly, facilitating learning on equality, diversity, and inclusion matters, and providing an evidence base that proves a return on investment for all helps engender buy-in.

Employers can take positive action to help groups of people when: • • •

They are disadvantaged in some way in relation to work Their participation in employment or training is particularly low They have particular needs that are different from other people.

The nature of the positive action may draw on the abovementioned list of diversity initiatives, including senior and line management support, policy and procedures, training, workplace accommodation and reasonable adjustments, special interest groups, and keeping a register of allies. RICS Inclusive Employer Quality Mark At industry level, professional bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) have taken steps to try and increase diversity in the industry. In 2015, the RICS launched their Inclusive Employer Quality Mark. Their approach is based on four key principles:

66  Ani Raiden and Andrew King 1 2 3 4

Leadership – demonstrable commitment at the highest level to increasing the diversity of the workforce Recruitment – engage and attract new people to the industry from under-represented groups, best practice recruitment methods Culture – an inclusive culture where all staff engage with developing, delivering, monitoring, and assessing diversity and inclusivity Development – training and promotion policies that offer equal access to career progression to all members of the workforce.

The Inclusive Employer Quality Mark now has 183 organisations involved, representing a workforce of over 300,000 (RICS, 2021). Delivering diversity: steps for action Other bodies, such as the British Academy of Management and Chartered Management Institute (CMI) (2020a, 2020b) have also published ‘steps for action’ on tackling specific issues, such as race inequality: • • • • •

•

•

Break the silence. Leaders need to re-boot the conversation on race, show commitment, and communicate a clear business case for change to deliver diversity. Learn from the gender agenda. Business has shown that it can generate momentum to make change happen, with inclusive leadership at all levels and transparency about strategies, targets, and progress Face the numbers. Measure it, manage it, report it. Companies need to measure BAME diversity at every level of the management pipeline. Tap into the power of sponsorship. Senior leaders need to actively seek out and meet diverse emerging leaders to sponsor them and support their development. Build diversity through ‘next up’ leadership. Role models and mentors at the next level up – not just remote role models at the top of business – can be powerful forces for change. Use innovative models like mentoring circles and reverse mentoring Be inclusive and adaptive. Build adaptive cultures that respond to the differences people bring to work. Make it clear that the company values difference, so no minority employee is left questioning whether they fit in Benchmark and collaborate. Businesses should compare performance with others in their sector and collaborate on ways to accelerate change.

For further information, see https://www.managers.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/moving-thedial-on-race-practical-guidance-cmi-race-2020.pdf

Managing people  67 Sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender reassignment Many LGBT+ people are unable to be themselves at work because of fear of negative comments or negative behaviour towards them. Discrimination and harassment are unfortunately widespread and trans people especially report high levels of bullying and harassment (Melville et al., 2020). The CIPD (2021b) has published the following recommendations for employers: •

•

• • •

Take steps towards building an inclusive culture – critically assess your organisation culture. Do you have a culture of inclusivity at work? Are your policies and practices underpinned by principles that actively celebrate and encourage differences? Do you have mechanisms in place through which employees can voice issues about inequality and voice their opinions on what needs to change? Review your organisation’s policies to ensure that they are gender-neutral and inclusive. Clear and enforced policies can reduce homophobic, biphobic, and transphobic bullying. Policies should include practical examples of unacceptable behaviour. Work closely with managers to ensure that they implement people management practices fairly and understand how to support trans staff. Work with an LGBT+ staff network in a positive and active way, ensuring a two-way dialogue and utilising staff insight and expertise to evaluate and change people policies, processes, and the organisation culture. Champion LGBT+ inclusion from the top of the organisation, for example, having leadership allies.

For further information, see https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/cpd-supporting-transgenderpeople-in-work/ https://w w w.personneltoday.com /hr/coming-out-at-work-advicefor-employers/ https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/relations/diversity Advancing gender equality in the workplace Smith and Johnson (2020) offer guidance on gender equality and representation in the workplace. They focus on the context of parental leave and flexible work arrangements being perceived to be for women alone, a view which fuels the ‘motherhood penalty’, and reinforces assumptions that women are not committed to paid work and are distracted by caregiving – biases that limit women’s careers. These perceptions also stigmatise such support programmes for men, leading to fewer men using them. The Covid-19 pandemic, and the new ways of working (for example, social distancing and working from home) can be used as an instrumental force

68  Ani Raiden and Andrew King in changing traditionally held gender norms. For example, working parents who have had to juggle work, home-schooling, and childcare responsibilities during local and national lockdowns are now more likely to have a more balanced and egalitarian understanding of caregiving and household responsibilities. Women still do more household chores, childcare, and homework, but men are increasingly gaining an appreciation for the importance of connection, vulnerability, and empathy in their personal and professional relationships. Fathers enjoy building relationships with their children and learning what it means to be an equal partner in terms of supporting their partner’s career. Because men vastly outnumber women in senior leadership roles in most organisations, and in all roles in the built environment, this is a golden opportunity for men-as-allies to become change agents and demonstrate vision, courage, and genuine collaboration with women to: • • •

Advocate for expanded and creative flexible work arrangements. Keep working parents in mind. Advocate for paid leave and sick leave, and available and affordable childcare, for all workers Show off your family life. Lead by example. When leaving work for children or family responsibilities, leave loudly. Normalise leaving work to meet your family obligations. Encourage other men to openly prioritise their own commitments to partners and children. And talk to your colleagues about your family.

For the Construction Employers Network for Equality & Inclusion, continuous organisational improvement is key. To enable this to happen, they argue that recording organisational demographics is important. Indeed, many organisations seek to record a range of characteristics, including ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. However, collecting data can be difficult as many employees and workers prefer not to share this information. Beyond race, LGBT+, gender, and people with caring responsibilities, other groups of people that may benefit from positive action measures in the context of the built environment include people with disabilities, care leavers, people from different ethnic and cultural heritages, people from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds, ex-offenders, and ex-forces personnel, to name but a few. There is also an opportunity to embrace the imagination of the younger generation of people and draw them into the sector to build a future workforce that is mature in understanding and valuing diversity, not only because of societal and organisational systems and initiatives related to managing equality, diversity, and inclusion, but because of wider movements like #CheckYourPrivilege, #MeToo, #BlackLivesMatter, and #March4Women. Whilst each movement highlights a specific issue, they also draw attention to thinking about a combination of characteristics: an ‘intersectionality’, which offers an analytical framework for understanding how various

Managing people  69 aspects of a person’s identities combine to create different modes of privilege and discrimination. For example, a disproportionately high percentage of black women have low-paid jobs; and conversely, a disproportionately high percentage of white men have well-paid jobs. Intersectionality Intersectionality describes how race, class, gender, and other individual characteristics ‘intersect’ with one another and overlap (Crenshaw, 1989). It is intended as a descriptive (not prescriptive) term to help better understand why specific forms of labour market inequality (and societal inequality) persist more fiercely than others, and thus why some social value initiatives may require more effort to provide a return on investment than others. There are many models of intersectionality that show a complex and nuanced picture of several intersecting layers of privilege, domination, and oppression. These are often represented by complex Venn and Wheel diagrams (for example, Morgan, 1996), and many have received intense criticism from experts in the field. However, as an entry point tool, for those who are beginning to develop their understanding of intersectionality, and importantly as an aid to spark reflection, such models have a useful role. We show a simplified version in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Layers of privilege, domination, and oppression Privilege

Domination

Oppression/resistance/ discrimination

Male and masculine Female and feminine Male White European heritage Heterosexual Able-bodied Credentialed Young Attractive

Genderism

Gender ‘deviant’

Sexism Racism Eurocentrism Heterosexism Ableism Educationalism Ageism Politics of appearance Classism

Female Non-white Non-European origin LGBT+ People with disabilities Non-literate Old Unattractive

Language bias Colourism Anti-Semitism Pro-natalism

English as a second language Dark Jews Fertile

Upper and upper-middle class Anglophones Light, pale Gentile non-Jew Infertile

Working class, poor

70  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Intersectionality calls for attention to equality, diversity, and inclusion as multidimensional and complex phenomena whereby privilege, domination, oppression, resistance, and discrimination are possible across a range of characteristics, not only those relating to the protected characteristics described in law. Furthermore, this view accepts that racism and sexism, for example, intersect to produce discrimination that is greater than the sum of the two (Crenshaw, 1989). Thus, organisational policy and practice align well with the SDG 10 Reduced inequalities and  target 10.2: to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status, and ideally produce conditions of employment that support and harness differences for the benefit of all. Similarly, SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth focuses attention on achieving full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value (target 8.5). Other targets draw attention to particular populations. Target 8.6 focuses on substantially reducing the proportion of youth not in employment, education, or training. In relation to SDG 5 Gender equality, targets 5.1, to end all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere, and target 5.5, to ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of ­decision-making in political, economic, and public lives, are specific to one gender. As we allude to above, the CIPD offers an extensive range of resources to support organisational development of policy and practices on managing equality, diversity, and inclusion; see https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/relations/diversity #gref

Chapter summary In this chapter, we have discussed ways of considering, delivering, and creating social value internally within organisations through good practice in managing people. We focused on everyday people-focused management and decision-making as central elements to social value and demonstrated how enhancing the opportunities and conditions relating to employment is one of the simplest ways for organisations to consider, create, and deliver social value. The built environment presents a unique opportunity for creating and delivering social value through employment and workforce diversification by extending recruitment efforts to reach out to marginalised groups. Construction work is a great local job creator, operating in remote and disadvantaged communities as well as in the heart of busy cities. Our discussion has addressed a range of SDGs, specifically 3 Good health and well-being, 5 Gender equality, 8 Decent work and economic growth, and 10 Reduced inequalities.

Managing people  71

References ACAS (2021) Checking your employment rights, https://www.acas.org.uk/checking-your-employment-rights [accessed 3 May 2021]. Atkinson, J. (1984) Manpower strategies for flexible organisations, Personnel Management, August, 28–31. CIPD (2021a) HR policies, Factsheet, London: CIPD, https://www.cipd.co.uk/ knowledge/fundamentals/people/hr/policies-factsheet#gref [accessed 15 April 2021]. CIPD (2021b) Sexual orientation, gender identity and gender reassignment, London: CIPD, https://www.cipd.co.uk/news-views/viewpoint/sexual-orientation-gender-identity [accessed 26 April 2021]. CMI (Chartered Management Institute) (2020a) Delivering diversity, https://www. managers.org.uk/deliveringdiversity [accessed 9 June 2020]. CMI (Chartered Management Institute) (2020b) Break the silence infographic, https://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Files/PDF/Insights/Delivering%20Diversity%20-%20Infographic%20-%202017.pdf [accessed 9 June 2020]. Crenshaw, K. (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics, University of Chicago Legal Forum, (1), Article 8, 139–167, http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8 [accessed 15 April 2021]. Dainty, A.R.J. and Loosemore, M. (2012) Human resource management in construction, critical perspectives (2nd ed.), Abingdon: Routledge. Fujiwara, D. and Dass, D. (2020) Measuring social value in infrastructure projects: Insights from the public sector, London: The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS). Green, S.D. (2011) Making sense of construction improvement, Oxford: Wiley, ISBN: 978-1-40513-046-2 Melville, S., Stonborough, E. and Gooch, B. (2020) LGBT in Britain – Bi report, London: Stonewall and YouGov. Morgan, K.P. (1996) Describing the emperor’s new clothes: Three myths of educational (in)equity, In Diller, A., Houston, B., Morgan, K.P. and Ayim, M., The gender question in education: Theory, pedagogy & politics, Boulder, CO: West view Press, 105–122. RICS (2021) Inclusive employer quality mark, https://www.rics.org/uk/about-rics/ responsible-business/diversity-and-inclusion/inclusive-employer-quality-mark/ [accessed 9 April 2021]. Smith, D.G. and Johnson, W.B. (2020) 3 ways to advance gender equity as we return to the office, Harvard Business Review, 11 June, https://hbr.org/2020/06/3-ways-toadvance-gender-equity-as-we-return-to-the-office?utm_source=linkedin&utm_ campaign=hbr&utm_medium=social [accessed 11 June 2020].

5

Degree apprenticeships Andrew King and Ani Raiden

This chapter focuses on apprenticeships, which often form one of the centrepieces of creating and evidencing social value. Despite their ubiquity in the construction industry, discussion related to the social value of apprenticeships is often limited to basics such as the total number of apprenticeships created on a project-by-project basis. This chapter seeks to reverse this trend by delving deeper into apprenticeships through the lens of quantity surveying degree apprenticeships. We focus on good practice and after an outline introduction to the apprenticeship system, we present organisational case studies that offer insights into the employer-mentors’, Counsellors’ and Supervisors’

• • •

Education and training at different levels On-the-job and off-the-job training Degree apprenticeships: University degree & professional qualification

• •

Experienced practitioners ‘give back’ to industry Higher levels of economic productivity through technological upgrading and innovation, e.g. on Building Information Modelling Apprentices take on ICT posts, use new software, create project networks, and introduce new workflows

•

• • •

Challenging Norms Positive Action Opportunities to target arange of under-represented groups

• •

University, employer, professional body, apprentice partnership Inter-disciplinary education

Figure 5.1 Apprenticeships and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-7

Degree apprenticeships  73 roles, and approaches to navigating the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) Assessment of Professional Competence. We then discuss the apprentice experience and draw attention to the opportunity to develop skills, attract new entrants to the industry, create competitive advantage and social value, improve equality, diversity, and inclusion, and connect with the SDGs. We relate to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 4 Quality education, 8 Decent work and economic growth, 10 Reduced inequalities, and 17 Partnerships for the goals.

Background Historically, one of the main routes into the construction industry is via apprenticeships, which combine work with training. Whilst often associated with younger staff and craft-based trades, apprenticeships are extremely varied and offer many opportunities in a range of sectors for both new and existing employees of various ages. For example, in England, there are four levels of qualification: • • • •

Intermediate level 2: the equivalent of five GCSE passes, Advanced level 3: the equivalent of two A-level passes, Level 3 Diploma, or International Baccalaureate, Higher levels 4–7: the equivalent of a Foundation Degree and above, Degree levels 6 and 7: the equivalent of a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree.

Generally, apprenticeships must last at least 12 months, although they can extend to several years. New accelerated apprenticeships have been developed to shorten the duration of the apprenticeship based on the apprentices prior learning (Department for Education, 2021a). Globally, apprenticeships are undergoing something of a revival (Kuczera and Field, 2018). Whilst there are a variety of different approaches, there are two main types of apprenticeship system: single and dual systems. The single system is characterised by its focus on developing defined vocational competencies, whereas the dual system incorporates formal education. The single system is typically English (or UK-based), whereas the dual system is followed in countries such as Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, Austria, and South Korea. In England, the Apprenticeship programme is delivered by the Education and Skills Funding Agency. In response to the lack of training associated with the single-track system, a requirement for a minimum of 20% of the apprentice’s paid hours to be dedicated to ‘off-the-job training’ was introduced in 2017. In dual-system countries, the apprentices partake in significant non-productive employer-led training outside of formal education; up to 50% of their time can be spent in off-the-job training.

74  Andrew King and Ani Raiden English apprenticeships are provided by an authorised provider, such as a University, the apprentice’s employer, or a combination of the two. They are outcomes-based and focused on the knowledge, skills, and behaviours needed for the role, which are assessed using an End Point Assessment system (Richard, 2012). Funding is provided by a levy system (as shown in Figure 5.2). Degree apprenticeships represent a major shift in the English training and education landscape. In construction, there are opportunities to study for a degree apprenticeship in design and construction management, construction site management, construction quantity surveying, building control surveying, town planning, architecture, civil engineering, building services engineering, facilities management, and geospatial mapping and science. One popular programme is the quantity surveying degree apprenticeships, our core focus in this chapter. For further information, see https://www.apprenticeships.gov.uk/employers/funding-an-apprenticeship

Figure 5.2 Apprenticeship levy.

Chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship The Chartered Surveyor Trailblazer Apprenticeship Group has created a chartered surveyor standard with three distinct pathways: • • •

Building Surveying Quantity Surveying & Project Management Property.

Degree apprenticeships  75 The corresponding Assessment of Professional Competence is based on the chartered surveyor apprenticeship standard (Institute for Apprenticeships, 2015) which identifies the minimum level of knowledge, skills, and behaviours that an apprentice must demonstrate throughout the degree programme and at the End Point Assessment (which we discuss later in the chapter). The standard contains eight core duties, three optional duties per each pathway, eighteen knowledge factors, fourteen skills factors, and five behaviour factors. For example, the first core occupation duty is to ‘Provide professional advice and recommendations to clients relating to land, property or construction’ and there are four areas of knowledge that relate to this duty, two skills factors, and five behaviour factors as shown below. Full detail, with clear tables of the duties, knowledge, skills, and behaviours for each of the three pathways (Building Surveying, Quantity Surveying & Project Management, and Property), is available via https://www.instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/ chartered-surveyor-(degree)-v1-2 Similar standards are available for other programmes via https://www. instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/ Nottingham Trent University (NTU) has a well-established history of educating quantity surveyors. Their chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship takes place over a six-year period and encompasses the BSc (Hons) Degree, workplace experience, and the RICS Assessment of Professional Competence as shown in Figure 5.3. Each apprentice at NTU is required to work and study for a university degree part-time on a day-release basis. The apprenticeship model provides for a wide variety of study options, including, for example, block release and front-loading (Department for Education, 2021a). As the knowledge, skills, and behaviours are assessed separately by the RICS, the chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship is a non-integrated apprenticeship (in an integrated apprenticeship, the knowledge, skills, and behaviours are assessed by the provider). The apprentices work full-time, which equates to four days working for their employer and one day focused on university work. They are employed by various key stakeholders in the industry, including clients, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors. In size, the employers range from micro enterprises through to large nationwide and global businesses. Andrew King helped start the workplace review process for quantity surveying degree apprenticeship students at NTU. He has managed over 170 students and we share key learning points from his experience in engaging with the students, their employers, the University, and the RICS.

76  Andrew King and Ani Raiden Chartered Surveyor (degree) apprenticeship standard example of the knowledge, skills, and behaviour factors related to Duty 1: Provide professional advice and recommendations to clients relating to land, property, or construction Knowledge • • •

•

K2: Information management – The methods and techniques for providing information, data and advice to clients. K5: Diversity and inclusion – The importance and recognition of diversity. Legal, regulatory and ethical requirements, including inclusive environments. K8: Ethics and professionalism – The role, governance and regulatory frameworks of the RICS. Global and professional ethical standards and Rules of Conduct and how to deal with ethical dilemmas. K9: Client relationships – How to manage client/customer relationships.

Skills • •

S1: Information management – Provide data, information and advice for clients relevant to the surveying discipline. S5: Consultancy – Manage instructions from engagement to completion.

Behaviours •

•

•

• •

B1: Provide a high standard of service – Always ensure your client, or others to whom you have a professional responsibility, receive the best possible advice, support or performance of the terms of engagement you have agreed to and ensure you always give attention to detail. B2: Act in a way that promotes trust in the surveying profession – Act in a manner, both in your professional life and private life, to promote you, your firm or the organisation you work for in a professional and positive way. B3: Act with integrity – Always be trustworthy, open, and transparent. Respect confidential information of your clients or potential clients and do not allow bias, conflict of interest or the undue influence of others to override your professional or business judgements or obligations. Always act consistently in the public interest when making decisions or providing advice. B4: Treat others with respect – Treat everyone with courtesy, politeness and respect and consider cultural sensitivities and business practices. B5: Take responsibility – Always act with skill, care and diligence and deal with any complaint in an appropriate professional manner.

Degree apprenticeships  77

Figure 5.3 Quantity surveying degree apprenticeship programme model at NTU.

NTU started to deliver their chartered quantity surveyor degree apprenticeship course in 2017. For the 2020/2021 academic year, almost 200 students were studying across all five years of the university degree. The programme is supported by a university-wide apprenticeships team who work with the construction management academic team and Workplace Tutors to deliver the course. Employer-mentors: central to apprentices’ development At the start of each apprenticeship, an apprentice agreement is formed between the three parties: NTU as the learning provider, the employer, and the apprentice. This tripartite agreement requires each apprentice to be assigned a mentor by the apprentice’s employer. The mentor helps the apprentice to: • • •

Identify internal and external learning opportunities Set and review goals relevant to the knowledge, skills, and behaviours of the apprenticeship standard Support their overall integration and progression at work.

The mentors play a crucial role in the apprentices’ development. Owing to the wide range of employers, it is perhaps not surprising that there is a correspondingly significant variance in the employer-mentor experience provided to apprentices. Some organisations have very well-developed approaches to mentoring students and good examples include, but are in no way not limited to, Bowmer + Kirkland, Faithful+Gould, Gleeds, Highways England, McCann, Pick Everard, RJA Consultants, Tarmac, Trebes Consulting, Turner

78  Andrew King and Ani Raiden Townsend, Willmott Dixon, and Winvic. It should also be noted that some other organisations do not have particularly well-developed approaches to mentoring their students but do have some excellent mentors. For those with neither, a small number of apprentices have to invest more energy in proactively helping shape a system that works for them and their employer. Making the most of the opportunity to connect classroom and workplace learning is key as one proactive mentor makes clear when referring to how he works with his mentee: I am involved with his studies on a regular basis by seeing what he has learnt about housebuilding in the previous University week and showing him where it is located and how it works on site every day. Each week we make a list of what has been covered on the modules and then we arrange a day to ensure we cover everything in practice. For example, if he is learning about the cavity walls of a house, I will get him to explain to me how they work and the different features of them when we are on site. We are lucky as we have just recently started a housing project which is running alongside his course very well as it explains to him the details of the construction methods and uses of materials and then he sees them in action on site. (Mentor, small developer) Gaining regular access to site to see first-hand how things are built is universally deemed key to effective learning by both mentors and mentees, albeit Covid-19 seriously disrupted this practice for many. One enterprising apprentice is taking the opportunity to further develop his practical knowledge by working on site with specialist subcontractors during the summer recess from university. Mentors themselves often derive significant social value from their role. In some organisations, supporting and developing new staff has become a key part of the role: That’s how we develop the next generation. I don’t know what I’d do without any apprentices to develop. (Senior Quantity Surveyor, Large National Contracting Group) Proactive mentors are invested in their mentees’ development and experiment with different approaches to create a rich learning environment. I have a ‘fact of the day’ and ‘word of the day’ with my team to try and stimulate learning. I also proofread my apprentices’ university submissions and I am keen that they develop appropriate English skills.

Degree apprenticeships  79 Producing coherent written work, particularly in emails, gets the message across and allows them to develop, unlike many in the industry where it is a dying skill. Also, conversation skills are key to the QS role the ability to start a conversation with confidence, even when it may be daunting. (Thomas D. Holmes, Commercial Manager, Bowmer + Kirkland) Other notable approaches to mentoring include a planned approach to rotating the apprentice throughout the different departments in the organisation, for example, from estimating through to planning and commercial departments. NTU advises employers to ideally provide one individual who will act as the apprentice’s mentor throughout the apprenticeship. This approach helps combat mentor-churn, which is sometimes experienced in larger organisations. This describes the situation where the mentor changes throughout the apprenticeship, for example, as the apprentice moves from project to project or from department to department as part of a rotation. Adhering to the NTU approach allows the apprentice’s line manager to change as the apprentice from project to project, and the mentor to stay the same and therefore offer consistency of approach and management of progress throughout the apprenticeship. Further good practice includes splitting the mentor role into (i) professional/technical mentoring and (ii) pastoral mentoring. Recognising the importance of supporting their apprentices’ overall well-being, RJA Consultants provide dedicated mentors to deal with these different aspects of the mentor role. Providing pastoral care is a key component of the majority of successful apprenticeships, though it is rarely identified and managed as clearly as in the RJA example. Many of the mentors involved in the study helped develop the next generation of professionals by ‘giving something back’ to an industry from which they had benefitted. Another way that industry practitioners were channelling their desire to contribute to the industry was through the RICS group which is focused on new members entering the profession. Many surveyors who had recently become chartered were keen to help others studying for their Assessment of Professional Competence by providing help with their diary, summaries of experience, case study, and preparation for presentation and interview. This has proven to be an extremely effective mechanism, whereby those who have recent experience of going through the Assessment of Professional Competence process were able to quickly and efficiently help upskill current apprentices. Further examples of giving something back include the RICS Ambassador Network, which seeks to raise awareness of the

80  Andrew King and Ani Raiden profession, and, in some instances, provide Counsellors to help apprentices with their Assessment of Professional Competence. Further details about the RICS Matrics group can be found at https://www.rics.org/uk/surveying-profession/global-professionalnetwork/matrics/ RICS Assessment of Professional Competence The RICS Assessment of Professional Competence is a central aspect of the apprenticeship. The students at NTU are registered for a 24-month Assessment of Professional Competence (recently temporarily extended 30-month period owing to Covid-19) consisting of: Further information about the RICS Assessment of Professional Competence is available via https://www.rics.org/uk/surveying-profession/join-rics/charteredmember-mrics/assessment-of-professional-competence-apc/ Structured development programmes A number of organisations have developed their internal structured training programmes to directly relate to the RICS Assessment of Professional Competence, such as the Highways England example provided below. Enlightened apprenticeship support and development include mock interview preparation, where apprentices are subjected to a range of questions they are likely to encounter in their final interview, with the questions often being posed by staff who are RICS Assessors. Regular professional and technical briefings are also carried out by some organisations, which follow a range of different formats. For example, apprentices are sometimes required to deliver a presentation and answer questions on a range of topics to a wide range of colleagues, including senior staff. These approaches are intended to develop knowledge, skills, and behaviours, including improving presentation skills and normalising dealing with difficult questions from experienced practitioners. A fundamental cornerstone of a successful RICS journey includes starting to record a diary at the start of the Assessment of Professional Competence route and then gaining early feedback on the entries from the Supervisor and Counsellor. In addition, creating a learning and development plan

Degree apprenticeships  81 The RICS Competencies Framework The RICS Competencies are split between mandatory, core, and optional competencies: • • •

Mandatory Competencies – personal and professional practice and business skills Core Competencies – the main technical skills Optional Competencies – additional specialist technical skills

Each competency is assessed at three levels: • • •

Level 1 – knowledge and understanding (the theory) Level 2 – application of knowledge (the doing) Level 3 – depth and synthesis of technical knowledge and implementation (giving reasoned advice/advising the client).

Apprentices need to demonstrate the mandatory competencies, and also the following Core Competencies to level three: • • • • • •

Commercial management (of construction works) or Design economics and cost planning Construction technology and environmental services Contract practice Procurement and tendering Project finance (control and reporting) Quantification and costing (of construction works).

In addition, apprentices are required to choose two optional competencies and demonstrate these to Level two from the following options: • • • • • • • • • •

Capital allowances Commercial management (of construction works) or Design economics and cost planning (whichever is not selected as core competency) Conflict avoidance, management and dispute resolution procedures or Sustainability Contract administration Corporate recovery and insolvency Due diligence Insurance Programming and planning Project feasibility analysis Risk management.

82  Andrew King and Ani Raiden

Figure 5.4 End Point Assessment.

incorporating the competencies, case study, final presentation, interview, and off-the-job training is important. The plan provides a structure to manage the Assessment of Professional Competence and it works as both an organisational and motivational tool. Tracking progress against the competencies identifies any gaps that the apprentices are not able to evidence in their existing role. These can then be met in a myriad of ways, including working in other departments, or possible secondment to other organisations. We now showcase the Highways England (formally the Highways Agency and an arms-length company owned by the Department for Transport) approach to managing their quantity surveying degree apprenticeship students. Their highly structured process illuminates the key aspects of the process.

Degree apprenticeships  83 Highways England approach to supporting and assessing apprentices’ learning and development Highways England are notable for their structured approach to working with graduates, apprentices, and placement students. In 2017 they formally launched their structured Quantity Surveying Graduate, Apprentice & Placement programme (focus here is given to the apprentice aspects of the programme). Monitoring the progress of their apprentices, based on specific outcomes, is carried out using an Assessment of Professional Competence Route Map and tracker, which, in turn, monitors the effectiveness of the programme. The Route Map provides a summary of the experience required to evidence the different RICS competency levels as well as the corresponding training and CPD opportunities available. The Assessment of Professional Competence tracker then monitors specific work activities against the competencies and is updated each month by the apprentice. This is a particularly useful tool for the apprentices and their RICS Counsellor where they qualified through a different RICS system (either qualifying under an old system or the alternative ‘experience’ route) and their Supervisor (where they themselves are not a chartered surveyor). The apprentice also records their Assessment of Professional Competence Learning Diary and provides the evidence to demonstrate how they have met each competency and sub-category. This information is then reviewed by their manager who updates the apprentice’s dashboard using a traffic light system. Where the apprentice’s current role does not allow certain competencies to be evidenced, this is identified and can then be managed through rotation in different teams and parts of the business to gain the necessary experience. The apprentice then shares which competencies they wish to be evaluated with the Counsellor who will question and probe to understand their depth of knowledge and understanding, including the nature and extent of evidence provided, prior to sign-off. The apprentice will then upload the best examples from their Learning Diary and Tracker to the RICS Assessment Resource Centre to evidence their competencies. In addition, recent developments include the apprentices entering their module grades from NTU to track academic progress and number of off-the-job/CPD hours undertaken. The various trackers are then combined into Microsoft Power BI software to allow a Performance Report to be generated that monitors the performance of the Graduate, Apprentice & Placement Programme across the business. The Power BI report incorporates three levels: Level 1 = Cohort/Programme Level Level 2 = Performance summary % completion by individual Level 3 = Link to the individuals Assessment of Professional Competence tracker to see individual competencies and the evidence/ experience recorded against each one.

84  Andrew King and Ani Raiden In addition to continuous improvement, the system identifies opportunities for Graduate, Apprentice & Placement recruitment in the different geographic regions across the business. Importantly, the Tracker helps determine each apprentice’s readiness for final RICS interview and identifies where extra time is required (taking account of the apprentice’s workload in order to avoid undue stress and promote overall mental health and well-being). The tracker also monitors when the apprentice will be leaving the programme to enter a permanent Quantity Surveying position. This allows specific career pathway plans to be developed for high performers to avoid losing them to competitors. The programme is constantly evolving and there is ongoing work to embed the soft skills that quantity surveyors need such as negotiation, communication and teamwork. In order to maximise the social value created, Highways England are keen to share their success in developing the Graduate, Apprentice  & Placement programme with other employers as open-source technology.

To create a sustainable future, we had to develop a model that addressed the need to develop our own commercial resources rather than rely on buying them in, this naturally led us to degree apprenticeship programmes to create our own pipeline of QS early talent. (Mark Ollerton, Major Projects Commercial Delivery Director, Highways England) RICS Counsellor In order to proceed with the RICS component of the degree apprenticeship, the apprentice needs to find and appoint a designated RICS Counsellor, who must be a member, or fellow, of the RICS. The Counsellor works in partnership with the University to help the apprentice gain the required range, and depth, of experience and training in preparation for their final assessment. They are also responsible for signing off their apprentice’s CPD records. A number of apprentices work in organisations that do not employ a chartered surveyor, which means that they do not have a default person to act as their Counsellor. Where this is the case, they generally approach the RICS and the University to help locate and appoint a Counsellor. It should be noted that the RICS does not currently have a list of available Counsellors. This is an area the RICS are focusing on and currently make use of their Apprenticeship Ambassador Network to act as Counsellors in certain situations. The RICS Matrics group and the LinkedIn RICS Assessments group

Degree apprenticeships  85 provide further ways to search for a Counsellor. The University Workplace Tutor, who interacts with a wide range of employers, is in some instances able to match candidates wanting a Counsellor with those willing and able to help. To help ensure the appointment process runs smoothly, the apprentices seeking a Counsellor are advised to begin the search at the start of their apprenticeship and make best use of their organisation’s existing professional networks. If the apprentice is ultimately unable to locate a Counsellor, they are transferred from the apprenticeship to the part-time quantity surveying degree. Some RICS Counsellors counsel students outside of their organisations. For example, one Counsellor, who is also an RICS Assessor and works with NTU, acts as a Counsellor for several Assessment of Professional Competence candidates in his own business in addition to several NTU students spread across different employers. The students are invited to take part in the Counsellor’s internal Assessment of Professional Competence training programme. This service is provided free of charge and the Counsellor also invites the wider group of NTU QS students to their online Assessment of Professional Competence-focused training sessions. The Counsellor’s reasons for doing this are clear: Helping develop the new generation is exactly what we should be doing as chartered surveyors. We have a responsibility to get involved and help provide the types of experience that will help shape the future of the industry. (Commercial Director, large national civil engineering contractor) The RICS is currently developing its promotion of the Counsellor role. There is an opportunity to elevate the status of the role by measuring the social value created by the acting-Counsellor, thereby allowing this to be attributed to the organisational measure of social value. One further possibility is for the Counsellor role to be promoted within the RICS as an explicit component of the journey towards becoming a fellow of the institution. RICS Supervisor In addition to the Counsellor, the Supervisor is an optional, but highly recommended role. It is a more close-range role than the Counsellor and is often fulfilled by the employer-mentor. The Supervisor is a particularly important role where the Counsellor works in a different organisation, or different internal department. The Supervisor does not need to be a member of the RICS and their often close working relationship with the candidate

86  Andrew King and Ani Raiden means that they have a greater ability to impact the work the candidate carries out to meet the competencies. A particularly effective way to raise awareness of the differing roles and responsibilities of the Counsellor and Supervisor is for the apprentice to deliver a presentation to their Counsellor and Supervisor highlighting the roles and responsibilities in detail. This helps draw out any assumptions the parties may have about their role and is then followed by a meeting to create the learning and development plan with the additional benefit of making the apprentices more proactive in ‘driving’ the Assessment of Professional Competence process (Figure 5.5). For further information, see https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/assessment/mricscounsellor-guide-rics.pdf Inspiring non-chartered mentors Many employer-mentors are not themselves chartered surveyors, yet find themselves acting as Supervisors in the Assessment of Professional Competence process. Prior to the introduction of the chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship, the route to becoming a chartered surveyor was less integrated with university education. A typical route to chartership was to study an RICS-accredited degree and then start the journey either to becoming chartered during the final stages of their degree or following graduation. One of the key reasons the employer-mentors gave for not initially becoming chartered was that they often spent the earlier parts of their careers working for contractors and subcontractors who at that time did not actively support the RICS Assessment of Professional Competence. In addition, as they progress with their careers and become more valuable to the company, their workload increases, which makes it more difficult to allocate the necessary time to becoming chartered. It is also worth noting that being chartered is still largely seen as a bonus, rather than a necessity, by main contractors. A number of these experienced industry practitioners who act as RICS Supervisors are considering starting their own journeytowards becoming chartered having gained an understanding of the route to, and benefits of, membership. Their awareness of the institution and the journey to becoming chartered is naturally raised as they supervise their apprentices. In this way, the chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship at NTU is having a positive impact on the professional bodies, CPD, and the lifelong learning of experienced practitioners, as well as the apprentices. In the same way that there are opportunities to promote the Counsellor role, the Supervisor role could be actively promoted as an entry point for experienced staff to work towards becoming Chartered.

Degree apprenticeships  87

Figure 5.5 Summary of the RICS Counsellor and RICS Supervisor activities for the 24-month Assessment of Professional Competence (APC) structured training (RICS, 2019a).

88  Andrew King and Ani Raiden Off-the-job training A key component of the apprenticeship is the requirement for the apprentice to commit a minimum of 20% of their normal working hours (paid hours excluding overtime) to off-the-job training (Richard, 2012). The Education and Skills Funding Agency (Department for Education, 2019: 6) provides the following definition: Off-the-job training is a statutory requirement for an English apprenticeship. It is training, which is received by the apprentice, during the apprentice’s normal working hours, for the purpose of achieving the knowledge, skills and behaviours of the approved apprenticeship referenced in the apprenticeship agreement. By normal working hours we mean paid hours excluding overtime. It is not on-the-job training which is training received by the apprentice for the sole purpose of enabling the apprentice to perform the work for which they have been employed. By this we mean training that does not specifically link to the knowledge, skills and behaviours set out in the apprenticeship. They also provide four key tests to determine whether the activity constitutes off-the-job training (Department for Education, 2019): • • • •

Is the person signed up to the apprenticeship programme? Is the activity directly relevant to the apprenticeship? Is the activity teaching new knowledge, skills, and behaviours? Is the learning taking place in the apprentice’s normal working hours?

Educating mentors and apprentices on the type of activities that qualify as off-the-job training is an ongoing process. Rather than relying solely on training courses, as is sometimes the case, employers can utilise a range of off-the-job training activities. The Education and Skills Funding Agency (Department for Education, 2019) clarifies that off-the-job training includes: • • •

The teaching of theory, for example, lectures, role playing, simulation exercises, online learning, and manufacturer training Practical training: shadowing, mentoring, industry visits, and attendance at competitions Learning support and time spent writing assessments and assignments.

The minimum 20% requirement is recorded using online activity logs, such as the NTU PebblePad system, where apprentices record the time

Degree apprenticeships  89 they spend studying. The apprentices are required to log their hours to ensure that all parties are complying with the apprenticeship funding model and Education and Skills Funding Agency requirements. Ensuring apprentices log these hours has historically been a challenge for the University and recent initiatives to raise awareness of the importance of this part of the process amongst apprentices and their mentors are beginning to pay dividends. Further details of off-the-job training can be found via htt p s://w w w.gov.u k /gover n ment /publ ic ations/apprentic e sh ip soff-the-job-training

Apprentice experience The vast majority of apprentices on the NTU programme have found their career choice to be dynamic, interesting, and rewarding. Shortly after starting their apprenticeships, they are incrementally given greater responsibility and autonomy, with many running their own projects with support from more senior staff.

‘Dangled in the deep end?’ The scale and complexity of the projects the apprentices are responsible for differ widely and range from small refurbishment and repair projects, valued at a few hundred pounds, to complex new build projects worth millions of pounds. The project-based competitive nature of the construction industry often requires the apprentices to work long hours with significant commercial responsibility, even at a relatively junior level. The need for apprentices to demonstrate their motivation, hard work, and resilience is essential to balance the competing demands of work, study, and home life. The apprentices who are perceived as consistently displaying these attributes are often rewarded with mentors who, in turn, invest significant time and effort in their development. As one mentor put it: It takes hard work, time and effort. If they want it, it’s there for them. They are the future – they need to put the effort in. I want to give my team the support they need and encourage them to work through it together. (Partner, small quantity surveying consultancy) Organisations also reward apprentices with leadership development opportunities, as we show through an example of apprenticeship support at Winvic:

90  Andrew King and Ani Raiden Winvic apprenticeship support Winvic is a relatively new and fast-growing multidisciplinary construction and civil engineering main contractor. They are perhaps primarily known for their work on industrial ‘sheds’, though they have expanded into new sectors, including build to rent and student accommodation. Their meritocratic approach to staff development is notable. Apprentices are given training and support and the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities – many quickly progress through the business taking on more responsibility as they are promoted to higher levels. An exemplar is one third year apprentice working for Winvic who was managing the commercial activities on two live construction projects totalling £70 million. The student was supervised and monitored in-line with the organisation’s existing commercial reporting procedures and had support available where required, but ultimately, they were carrying out lead surveyor duties and were found to be excelling in their role

Overall, the degree of autonomy and responsibility experienced by the apprentices varies widely across the cohort, even within the same employers. Whilst this is sometimes linked to individual apprentices’ knowledge, skills, and behaviours, it is also often a product of general organisational dynamics and the differing approaches to mentoring. Unsurprisingly, in addition to covering fundamental safety, health, and environmental issues, a period of ‘bedding in’ at the start of the apprenticeship is often used to introduce the apprentices to organisational and project procedures. This stage involves apprentices starting to carry out limited role-specific duties such as ‘taking-off’ bills of quantities or working on valuations of completed works. For many employers, this quickly develops into giving their apprentices greater responsibility, such as managing relatively simple and low-value subcontract packages on site, before taking on larger and more complex packages and eventually running their own projects of varying size (see Figure 5.6). As one apprentice put it, being increasingly ‘dangled in the deep end’ in this way, in tandem with a proactive mentor who is available to answer questions and offer direction, is an extremely effective way to develop knowledge, skills, and behaviours. Without exception, all mentors were keen that their apprentices check their developing understanding by regularly asking questions: This is what we expect at this stage, they need to ask as many questions as possible and then evaluate and apply the learning. (Quantity Surveyor, medium-sized contractor)

Degree apprenticeships  91

Figure 5.6 Increasing apprentice’s autonomy and responsibility in stages.

The types of activities that the apprentices carry out vary widely and examples include early stage cost planning and budgeting of specific work packages through to entire projects, estimating, procurement, contract drafting and administration, valuations, payments, cost-value reconciliations, agreeing final accounts and developing, or responding to, claims. In addition, apprentices were often found to be managing their own teams and mentoring their own staff, which was seen as a way to consolidate and further develop their knowledge, skills, and behaviours. The NTU Workplace Tutor has a key role working with employers and apprentices to review progression. The reviews at NTU now take place every three months and the Workplace Tutor team is expanding to work with the increasing number of apprentices. The reviews offer the opportunity to consider a range of key criteria related to knowledge, skills, and behaviour development: •

Academic Progress: for example, workload, submissions to date, assessment and feedback, functional skills (where applicable), and support systems

92  Andrew King and Ani Raiden • • • •

• • •

Workplace Progress: for example, workload, specific activities, roles and responsibilities, development plans, and support systems Opportunities to create closer integration between academic and workplace knowledge, skills, and behaviours Off-the-job training and use of PebblePad software for progress monitoring RICS Assessment of Professional Competence Progress: diary, summaries of experience competencies, Counsellor and Supervisor input, case studies (this aspect, including case studies and final presentation/interview, is managed more specifically by the dedicated RICS contact at NTU) Safeguarding and prevent issues Remote working issues (particularly important during the pandemic) Pastoral issues.

Key actions are agreed and reviewed on a rolling basis and the close working relationship between NTU and the employer offers the opportunity to further cultivate industry-academic networks. Mentors increasingly provide valuable feedback on university modules and deliver specialist lectures. The reviews are supplemented by a series of NTU-specific RICS Webinars to raise awareness of key aspects of the Assessment of Professional Competence. These sessions comprise cohort-specific NTUdeveloped and RICS-led events in tandem with those led by NTU staff and former NTU quantity surveying students who are now themselves chartered surveyors. Digital leaders Digital skills play an increasingly important role in the construction industry. For example, whilst traditional manual approaches are used to teach the principles of ‘taking off’ bills of quantities, in practice many of the apprentices use digital software packages to carry out this process in the workplace. Owing to their well-developed ICT skills, many apprentices quickly become involved in training older staff, including their own workplace mentors. Likewise, the move to Building Information Modelling, where complex models are used to plan, design, construct, and manage construction projects, gives further opportunity for apprentices to diversify their work and add value in different ways. Many apprentices on the NTU-surveying programme have taken on key ICT positions within their organisations; such was their ability to quickly understand and effectively use new software, create project networks, and introduce new workflows. In the days preceding the first Covid-lockdown in the UK, one apprentice

Degree apprenticeships  93 took responsibility for successfully dismantling the office IT network and then redesigning and installing home-based networks for the staff in his company. Another apprentice developed and introduced an electronic signature system that allowed large payments to continue to be made for a high-profile and high-value construction project throughout a period of enforced home working. Apprentices often take a lead in managing the introduction of new specialist software, including training staff. Promoting the increasing need for digital skills is one area that could help revolutionise how the industry is perceived and help tackle the skills shortage. For example, linking Building Information Modelling to popular platforms such as Minecraft could help engage and enthuse younger people to join the industry. Motivated performers A number of students stated that before starting their apprenticeship, they did not know what they wanted to do for their careers and felt like they were unfocused, unmotivated, and disenfranchised. As one apprentice put it: I really felt quite unmotivated and didn’t have a clue what I wanted to do. After I started working and getting to grips with it, I started to change the rest of my life. I feel a lot different now. (Apprentice Quantity Surveyor, small contractor) After starting work as a quantity surveyor, the apprentices often go through a relatively quick development process where they become accustomed to the structure provided both by their role and by the expectations of their employers. In turn, this changes their approach to their wider lives as they quickly become more disciplined and seek out new responsibilities, often approaching their academic studies at the University with significant relish. The ability to see the relationship between their university study and the work they carry out in their working role provides an incentive to work harder and secure good grades, especially where these activities are related directly to the existing staff review process. For those few apprentices who work in roles with limited activities, for example, those in more specialist areas such as mechanical and electrical works, the relationship between their working life and university work is less clear and this is often cited as a demotivating factor. In these cases, gaining work experience through activities more closely associated with their university work, either in the same organisation or through secondment to external organisations, helps create a relevant learning experience and meet the requirements of the apprenticeship funding.

94  Andrew King and Ani Raiden Many apprentices are proud of their job and the contribution they make to the industry and to society as whole. The intrinsic reward of feeling good about working is an important factor that is shared by many apprentices: Construction offers people a sense of pride that you’ve made a contribution. What doesn’t get sold is that once you get into the role, you take pride and it’s intrinsically rewarding. (Apprentice Quantity Surveyor, large national consultant) The sense of feeling engaged and proud is particularly the case where they have the opportunity to work on larger, more complex, and prestigious projects in their local area. The students clearly see the value of vocational education where on-the-job and off-the-job training is combined as they feel that they learn better this way and stay motivated. The attrition rate for the chartered quantity surveying degree apprenticeship at NTU is extremely low at 2.5% for all five years of the degree for the 2020/2021 academic year. Earn whilst you learn A number of apprentices note that whilst they had been encouraged to work towards a conventional three-year degree at school or college, they were keen to follow an approach where they could practise their skills earlier and felt somewhat unmotivated by the thought of studying for years in formal education. I’m glad I have gone down the apprenticeship route rather than studying full-time. I have more knowledge and its good for me to be working in a professional manner earlier. (Apprentice Quantity Surveyor, large national consultant) Another important factor is the cost of a conventional degree. University education tuition fees potentially lead to around £27,000 of debt before living costs are added. Indeed, the financial benefits of studying for a degree apprenticeship are seen as a major benefit by all apprentices. In addition to earning a wage that often substantially exceeds £20,000 (in some instances being more than double this figure), the apprentices are not required to pay for their degree as the cost is met by the employer through the apprenticeship levy funding model. The benefits of becoming a chartered surveyor are similarly positive. Figures show that the median average salary for a chartered surveyor was £48,000 in 2019, which is 39% higher than non- qualified professionals (RICS, 2019b). Recognising the disparity in analysis, the RICS figures are 54% higher than the current UK median full-time wage of £31,461 for the tax year ending 5 April 2020 (ONS, 2020). It should be noted

Degree apprenticeships  95 that, all things being equal, there tends to be a less significant pay difference between chartered and non-chartered surveyors working for contractors. Throughout my career I have always given the same advice and that is to choose the day release route instead of the full-time route. The main reason being that experience is a priority for any prospective employer. (Matt Kamionko, Managing Quantity Surveyor, Bowmer + Kirkland) Family and friends careers advice Almost without exception, the NTU apprentices note that their choice of career was influenced by family and social networks rather than formal careers advice. A family member, friend, or friend of the family, who works in the industry, often as a quantity surveyor themselves, led the majority of apprentices to their career choice. I left school at 18 and wanted to be in the army, but it didn’t work out. My dad was a commercial manager at a large construction company. I did some work experience at a consultancy and loved it, then got a job at Volkers. I love it here, I’m passionate about the industry and now help the University promote the careers to others. (Apprentice Quantity Surveyor, large national contractor) School careers advice for the apprentices either made no reference whatsoever to the construction industry or actively dissuaded pursuing a career in the sector. With the exception of one student who undertook an online career profiling exercise that identified quantity surveying as a possible positive career choice, discussion of construction careers solely focused on craft-based roles. It was quite a few years ago now, I was doing work experience at an estate agent and the owner there was talking to me about different jobs that he thought I would like. He asked if I’d thought about surveying and quantity surveying, and I said I didn’t know about it. So, I researched it, liked everything about it and I started as a contractor’s QS, but it wasn’t a very nice company, so I got a job here and I really like it here. So, it was a coincidence really to learn about quantity surveying. Even though we have a lot of apprenticeship fairs, the craft-based careers are out there, and we know about them, but the professional careers need promoting – what they are, what you do and what the benefits are for a young person entering the career. Young people are interested in what the benefits to them are – the pay and what the overall benefits of the role are. (Apprentice Quantity Surveyor, quantity surveying and project management consultancy)

96  Andrew King and Ani Raiden There exists a significant opportunity to elevate the profession, and sector in general, and to engage with a range of new entrants, those entering the world of work and those retraining from existing careers. Whilst our focus has been on quantity surveyors, the employers also work with a number of early stage industry entrants in a wide range of craft-based and professional positions, who are often developing quickly and enjoying their work and the benefits it provides.

An opportunity to develop skills, attract new entrants, create competitive advantage and social value, and connect with the SDGs Enlightened employers are increasingly promoting the developmental work they do with apprentices as a way to attract new entrants. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the skills shortage and positive nature of their apprentices’ experiences, clients are often keen to know more about how organisations develop new talent and hence create social value. In turn, this is increasingly recognised as a way to create competitive advantage by employers. The apprentices also create social value through their activities. Examples include: • •

Visits to schools and sixth forms to encourage students to join the construction industry and to undertake apprenticeships Active engagement with professional bodies – for example, a number of NTU QS were on the CIOB Novus Nottingham Board in 2020, which included them hosting network events.

Looking at the traditional notion of a ‘construction’ skills shortage in more depth, part of the problem is trying to operationalise such a wide and diverse concept as construction in a way that potential entrants can grasp. It is difficult because the construction industry extends over such a wide range of fields: design, engineering, construction, commercial, financial, and professional, to name a few. The resulting range of activities are channelled through a significant amount of constantly evolving careers, which are arranged under a wide range of job titles that differ extensively between employers. Increasing digitisation and technological development creates further complexity to add to the mix. We need to start looking at the careers at a more granular level, to focus on the different activities, the different roles, and the people who carry them out. Using real stories conveyed in simple non-technical language will allow more people to become aware of, understand, and engage with this interesting and quickly evolving industry and sector. Looking at the different aspects of construction in this way perhaps also allows us to capitalise on the satisfaction that many in the industry derive from their roles to help attract new entrants. It also allows us to engage people in the industry to become part of the solution to the skills shortage rather than it being someone else’s problem. The people involved in this book, who work in various roles

Degree apprenticeships  97 in the industry, often feel very engaged and passionate about what they do and take pride in it. They particularly enjoy helping to provide solutions for some of society’s problems, such as housing and infrastructure.

Workplace tutor view ‘We have some fantastic employers and apprentices who are often working way beyond where most people would imagine an apprentice to be. The key now is sharing these stories more widely and opening up more opportunities for people from a range of backgrounds. Progress mapping and systems integration is the current frontier – the University has a range of different systems and ensuring these can easily connect with internal and external parties is key. We continue to focus energy on educating employers and apprentices about their role in the apprenticeship. This revolves around off-the-job training, creating greater connection between university and workplace activities, gaining their active involvement in the review process, as well as integration with the RICS. The review process itself creates a significant administrative burden and we are really focusing on creating efficiencies here so we can add value where it matters – the learners’ overall journey. The mentors and apprentices often work in high-risk environments with significant responsibilities that need managing in challenging timeframes. As such, we work hard to create healthy relationships that allow us to ensure everyone meets their commitments’. Andrew King, NTU

NTU is investing significant resources in developing its systems infrastructure, processes, and teams to make the most of the significant developmental opportunities available. This includes developing a long-awaited employer-facing dashboard to offer simple access to key progress metrics. From 1 April 2021, OFSTED became the single body for the inspection of apprenticeship training. OFSTED’s rigorous processes offer the opportunity to further refine the quality of provision in the sector. Post-16 education is attracting much attention in the UK beyond the degree apprenticeships too. The government’s Skills for Jobs White Paper (Department for Education, 2021b) is focused on ensuring people gain the skills they need for the workplace by placing employers at the heart of the system. The lifetime Skills Guarantee (2021c) sets out to ensure that adults without a level-three qualification (A-level or equivalent) can gain access to a free college course (launched with over 400 qualifications).

98  Andrew King and Ani Raiden Inter-disciplinary education The quantity surveying apprenticeship standard is understandably role-specific and in this way mirrors conventional approaches to degree-education. Whilst this gives focus to the essential knowledge, skills and behaviours required by the respective apprentices, it can limit their outlook and ability to work effectively as part of a team. Construction requires professionals from a range of backgrounds to integrate and coalesce, particularly when working on projects adopting collaborative approaches to procurement. Being able to appreciate the differing and often competing needs of other disciplines is one area that offers significant opportunity. Quantity surveyors and architects are prime examples. Often characterised as foes, they have much to gain from each other. A senior quantity surveyor in a Quantity Surveying and Project Management Consultancy sheds light on the issue by considering his experiences of working with architecture students. Several times and for several different architectural practices I have been asked to assist by giving final year students informal training on the Building Cost information Service and the art of developing a cost plan for their chosen design. This has only happened because the practices know me and have asked for my assistance and has generally led to an intense seminar type evening taking the architectural students through the basics. Generally, they have all appeared to be appreciative and benefitted from the experience and helped them on their way to their own qualification. They have all at the end expressed the benefit of knowing to even a limited extent how we QS’s work. We work in an industry that thrives on individual skill sets but I feel the industry would benefit greatly from greater cooperation and training in understanding each profession’s role and the art of co operation. In my opinion the best results are usually achieved by the best team rather than the best collection of individuals. It works both ways our QS profession would benefit from understanding something of the strains and difficulties and technical aspects of architects and engineers of all disciplines. It has struck me that changes in training owing to the pandemic provides an opportunity to form some limited link between courses for fostering interdisciplinary cooperation. I think the current apprenticeship system is a refreshing change helping to develop our young QS’s into skilled professionals; however, we need to drive the industry forward to greater change, and I feel that greater inter-disciplinary cooperation would greatly assist this. Paul Marriott, Senior Quantity Surveyor, RJA Consulting

Degree apprenticeships  99 T-Levels also offer a potentially valuable new way to introduce young people to the industry. They are a new two-year qualification for 16–19-year-olds that follow on from GCSEs and constitute the equivalent of three A-levels. They provide a 45-day industry placement, thereby allowing students get valuable workplace experience and develop their knowledge, skills, and behaviours. 80% of students time is classroom-based and 20% workplace-based, providing employers with the opportunity to connect with new talent. Construction is one of the designated skill areas with a focus on the following: • • •

Design, surveying, and planning Onsite construction Building services engineering

The RICS are working with Amazing Apprenticeships to raise awareness of the profession and case studies of quantity surveying apprentices are included on their site. Another interesting development is the way that some employers are developing their own approaches to practical craft-based training. One example is Hodgkinson from the Midlands, UK, who have recently started their own in-house brickwork academy to deliver site-based, rather than classroom-based, learning. For further information, see https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skills-for-jobs-lifelonglearning-for-opportunity-and-growth https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hundreds-of-free-qualificationson-offer-to-boost-skills-and-jobs https://www.tlevels.gov.uk/ https://amazingapprenticeships.com/ Equality, diversity, and inclusion As a popular route into the industry, apprenticeships have a key role to play in creating greater equality, diversity, and inclusion. The construction industry’s reputation as white, able-bodied, and male-dominated represents a huge opportunity to broaden engagement and unleash creativity. To allow the industry to effectively serve the needs of society, it needs a workforce that represents society. At the moment, it drastically underperforms in this regard. We need to ensure that people are treated fairly and equally, with people from disadvantaged and under-represented backgrounds, given the same opportunities as their peers. At a time when the industry goes through ever greater change, there exists a real opportunity to broaden engagement and create more diverse and innovative workplaces with benefits for employees, employers, and other stakeholders. Recognising, respecting, and indeed celebrating individual differences have the power to transform for the better. Similarly, creating an inclusive environment requires open and transparent

100  Andrew King and Ani Raiden dialogue to ensure that unconscious bias is brought out into the open as an important step in everyone feeling valued (Figure 5.7). As discussed in Chapter 4, equality legislation sets out the minimum standards of protection on the basis of protected characteristics at a societal level. Adding value to people’s lives, organisations, and the wider society requires organisations to go beyond their legal requirements however and engage with people from a range of backgrounds in an open, transparent way. Beyond the protected characteristics, there is a job to do in ‘levelling up’ the workforce; only 13% of degree apprenticeship students come from the bottom 20% of deprived neighbourhoods (Cullinane and Doherty, 2020). Managing diversity and inclusion policy and initiatives can be a useful vehicle for harnessing individual differences for business benefit. Widening participation is key with regard to apprenticeships. Cullinane and Doherty (2020) believe that this requires: •

•

•

Contextual university and workplace admissions for degree apprenticeships (where a range of barriers are considered, for example, which school applicants attend, where they live, the financial situation at home). For further information, see https://www.ucas.com/connect/ blogs/what-contextual-admissions Regular publishing of widening participation statistics that include socio-economic background, 30/35+ age categories for accurate age demographics, prior educational achievements, and post-completion labour market outcomes Levy money to be used for promoting access activities: bursaries, outreach, recruitment, travel for disadvantaged apprentices, and basic skills.

For further information, see https://www.suttontrust.com/ Furthermore, it is important to make students aware of the system and benefits that apprenticeships offer and different organisations can play an active role in doing this. Clearly, there is a need to develop a more sophisticated careers advice system in schools. However, given that research shows that many teachers would either rarely or never advise apprenticeships to high-performing students (The Sutton Trust, 2021), in the short-term, more direct approaches such as company visits to schools and experience days can provide an invaluable source of information to potential candidates. Showcasing organisational policy and practice on managing diversity and inclusion can further help encourage applicants from varied backgrounds. Considering the University perspective, NTU’s Success for All initiative aims to address disparities in student engagement and outcomes in order to meet commitments identified in their Access and Participation Plan 2020/21– 2024/5. It is informed by sector research on a range of interventions targeted at university, school, and course levels and articulated in a Theory of

Degree apprenticeships  101

Figure 5.7 Steps to encouraging greater diversity of apprentice.

Change methodology, with clear objectives, milestones, and evidence-based rationales underpinning the specific activities. Dr Paul Whitehouse, the School Standards and Quality Manager in the School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment at NTU, outlines their approach:

102  Andrew King and Ani Raiden To support this work, NTU has developed Success for All data toolkits which can show specific progression and attainment disparities across a range of Success for All demographics. Academic teams can then refine the data at school or course level, adjusted for mode and year of study, to help inform planning and decision-making. In the School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment, the five-year Success for All plan includes the following interventions: • • • • • • • • •

Research and development into the long-term (post-Covid) pedagogical benefits of blended learning Driving innovation in inclusive assessment and feedback Expanding student mentoring Creation of an equality, diversity, and inclusion committee Embedding equality, diversity, and inclusion extracurricular opportunities Building a sense of community and belonging Commitment to increasing student recruitment diversity Supporting recruitment and leadership opportunities for underrepresented staff Decolonising the curriculum, policies, and processes.

Overall governance of the plan resides within the School’s Standards and Quality Committee, which monitors specific projects allocated to relevant working groups and other school committees. We share the experience of one high-performing student who has recently chosen the quantity surveying degree apprenticeship at NTU over a more academic model of study shown below. Ayesha’s experience connects to a number of themes in relation to managing people: organisational culture, equality, diversity and inclusion, careers and training and development. Her experience also taps into many SDGs, for example, 4 Quality education, SDG 5 Gender equality, 8 Decent work and economic growth, and 10 Reduced inequalities. Furthermore, the specific targets relevant to discussion in this chapter include: SDG 4 Quality education: targets 4.3, to ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational, and tertiary education, including university; 4.4, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs, and entrepreneurship; 4.5, to eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations.

Degree apprenticeships  103 Ayesha Ansar experience August 2020 was a rather unusual and emotionally challenging time for me, I had to rely on the effectiveness of a new and rather flawed grading system to determine my A-Level grades. This was because my exams had been cancelled due to the Coronavirus pandemic. Results day eventually came along, and I was very relieved to see that I had been awarded A*AA. This meant that I had secured my place at the University of Cambridge to read Land Economy and met the requirements for the quantity surveying degree apprenticeship programme at Highways England. I was in a situation that was considered to have been quite fortunate, but in all honesty, I felt as though I was at a crossroads. After a lot of thinking and deliberating, I realised that the degree apprenticeship route was going to serve me better, in both the shortand long-term. This decision came from objectively viewing both options and assessing my needs, as well as planning ahead for what my needs will be like in the next five years. I did a lot of research, and it quickly became apparent that in the construction industry, the level of experience that you hold is given greater preference in comparison to how you acquired your academic qualifications. I also considered the other benefits that come from doing a degree apprenticeship, for example, I will be able to follow a well-structured plan for the next five years while being exposed to many development and networking opportunities. With all of this in mind, I declined my place at Cambridge and started working in the Area 7 Commercial team at Highways England in September 2020. I very quickly realised that I had made the right choice. I noticed just how welcoming and inclusive the culture at Highways England is and my worries about ‘fitting in’ as a woman from a BAME background were dispelled very quickly. My team-members did everything that they could to help me with settling in and with getting to grips with my role. Their willingness to provide me with guidance and support when I was stuck (which happened a lot!) was admirable and it made me feel as though I was working in an office instead of at home on my own. Adjusting to working from home was manageable as I had never worked in an office prior to starting my job, so I was none the wiser. There were still moments where I felt a little overwhelmed, but they were temporary and short-lived. I am quite hopeful for what is to come from my career at Highways England and I seek great satisfaction in knowing that by working in what is considered to be a ‘male-dominated’ industry, I will be defying limiting stereotypes and setting new expectations as a woman and an individual from a BAME background. Ayesha Ansar, Highways England based NTU Quantity Surveying Degree Apprentice

104  Andrew King and Ani Raiden SDG 5 Gender equality: target 5.5, to ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic, and public lives. SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth: target 8.6, to substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education, or training. SDG 10 Reduced inequalities: target 10.2, to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

Chapter summary Hearing about the challenges, opportunities, and benefits those working in the industry experience, in their own voice, cuts through the often-incessant marketing chatter and appeals to new entrants based on lived experience rather than marketing spin. That is what this chapter has sought to do – to begin to deconstruct one area of the construction sector: the training and education of quantity surveyors. By looking at how people enter the industry via the degree apprenticeships route, we start to see all the beneficial work that is taking place and the significant opportunities available. By exploring this area from a range of perspectives, the apprentice, the employer, the mentor, the University provider, and the professional body, we start to reassemble a richer understanding of this part of the industry and illuminate both the social value already being created and the huge potential to deliver more. This chapter has sought to reverse the trend of discussing apprenticeships from the perspective of a simple expenditure-recruitment ratio by dealing with the important details. We have focused on the apprenticeship system, the employer-mentor role, the RICS Assessment of Professional Competence. This included a discussion around the development and use of structured training programmes, such as that developed by Highways England, that can aid the apprentice’s journey towards becoming chartered. We also highlight the important roles played by the RICS Counsellors and Supervisors and discuss issues that arise for non-chartered mentors. We have explored the dynamics of off-the-job training and the overwhelmingly positive experiences that the chartered surveying apprentices enjoy. ‘Dangled in the deep end?’ detailed approaches to gaining workplace experience, and the section on ‘Digital leaders’ demonstrated how apprentices can become very valuable in leading technological development in their organisations. Apprentices often quickly develop into motivated performers progressing with pace through the requisite knowledge, skills, and behaviours and working with significant autonomy and responsibility and earning whilst they learn.

Degree apprenticeships  105 Despite the numerous benefits articulated here, entry into quantity surveying apprenticeships often relies on informal introductions and awareness raised by family and friends who already work in the industry. This current state limits the opportunity to attract people into the industry. Importantly, we explore the opportunities available to help reverse the industry skills shortage. Moving the discussion away from ‘construction’ and onto a more granular consideration of specific activities and roles, as articulated by those working in the industry, will help with this endeavour. Through the sharing of lived experiences, both good and bad, we believe that there is the opportunity to encourage more people to work in this often dynamic, interesting, and well-rewarded sector. In a similar way, sharing stories of historically under-represented groups, who are increasingly thriving and challenging industry norms, such as those from ethnic minorities, can help encourage more to follow in their footsteps.

References Cullinane, C. and Doherty, K. (2020) Degree apprenticeships: Levelling up? Making degree apprenticeships work for social mobility: The Sutton trust, https:// www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Degree-ApprenticeshipsLevelling-Up.pdf [accessed 10 March 2021]. Department for Education (2019) Apprenticeship off-the-job training, policy background and examples, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apprenticeshipsoff-the-job-training [accessed 10 February 2020]. Department for Education (2021a) Flexible apprenticeships in construction, https:// www.ecitb.org.uk/blog/2021/04/28/new-manual-to-support-flexible-apprenticeships/ [accessed 30 April 2021]. Department for Education (2021b) Skills for jobs: Lifelong learning for opportunity and growth, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skills-for-jobs-lifelonglearning-for-opportunity-and-growth [accessed 15 March 2021]. Department for Education (2021c) Hundreds of free qualifications on offer to boost skills and jobs, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hundreds-of-free-qualifications-on-offer-to-boost-skills-and-jobs [accessed 12 April 2021]. Institute for Apprenticeships (2015) Chartered surveyor (degree) standard, https:// www.instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/charteredsurveyor-(degree)-v1-2 [accessed 21 February 2021]. Kuczera, M. and Field, S. (2018) Apprenticeship in England, United Kingdom, OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training, Paris: OECD Publishing, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264298507-en. ONS (2021) JOBS02: Workforce jobs by industry, https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/datasets/ workforcejobsbyindustryjobs02 [accessed 9 April 2021]. Richard, D. (2012). Richard review of apprenticeships, London: Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-richardreview-of-apprenticeships. RICS (2019a) Counsellor guide, https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/ media/assessment/mrics-counsellor-guide-rics.pdf [accessed 20 September 2020].

106  Andrew King and Ani Raiden RICS (2019b) UK rewards & attitudes survey, London: RICS & McDonald & Company. RICS (2021) Inclusive employer quality mark, https://www.rics.org/uk/about-rics/ responsible-business/diversity-and-inclusion/inclusive-employer-quality-mark/ [accessed 9 April 2021]. The Sutton Trust (2021) Apprenticeships – Our priorities, https://www.suttontrust. com/our-priorities/apprenticeships/ [accessed 10 April 2021].

6

Social value in procurement Ani Raiden and Andrew King

In this chapter, we focus on the role that social procurement can play in considering, delivering, and creating social value. We start with an outline of both direct and indirect approaches to developing social procurement policy and practice. By drawing on an exemplar case of a micro firm in the UK that delivers social value through the supply chain, we demonstrate how social procurement is relevant beyond public sector bodies and large contracting organisations. We present both top-down and bottom-up models for developing social procurement practice and highlight the benefits of engaging with social enterprises

• • • •

Local business opportunities Employment opportunities and skills development Apprenticeships Public sector frameworks

•

Contractors from disadvantaged areas

•

Minority-owned businesses, for example,businesses owned or run by people with disabilities, women and/ or ethnic minorities

• • • •

Reduction, reuse, and recycling of materials Product and materials life cycle extension Specification of Fair trade Social Enterprises

• • • •

Cross-sector collaboration Frameworks Supply-chain collaboration Top-down schemes & bottom-up approach

Figure 6.1 Social value in procurement and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-8

108  Ani Raiden and Andrew King and social businesses. Our discussion addresses a range of SDGs, specifically 8 Decent Work and Economic Growth, 10 Reduced inequalities, 12 Responsible consumption and production, and 17 Partnership for the goals.

Procurement is the process by which organisations obtain the products and services they need for the achievement of their project or organisational objectives. Consideration in this endeavour is generally given to time, cost, and quality criteria, which are sometimes conceptualised in terms of overall value for money. The process involves some form of selection process, which in the construction industry often results in a competitive tender that incorporates a prequalification process that seeks to filter out unsuitable bidders. There have been repeated calls to move away from lowest capital cost tendering, an approach that often results in an ability to compete projects on time and to the requisite cost and quality criteria. Moreover, the much larger lifecycle costs are often missing entirely from the equation. The drive to embed more of a shared ethos of partnership, collaboration, and innovation has led to the use of value-based selection criteria, new procurement routes, and contract derivatives, such as frameworks and the new multi-party NEC4 Alliance Contract. In addition, it has led to the increasing popularity of ‘social procurement’, which is the focus of this chapter. For further information about the NEC4 alliance contract, see https://w w w.neccontract.com /NEC4-Products/NEC4-Contracts/ NEC4-Alliance-Contract

Social procurement Social procurement differs from traditional procurement as it seeks to leverage additional social benefits to create social value in local communities, beyond the simple act of purchasing the requisite products and services. Importantly, it can be both direct and indirect. Direct approaches involve procuring from a range of for-social-benefit entities: • • • • •

Not-for-profits Social enterprises Minority-owned businesses, such as business owned or run by people with disabilities, women, and/or ethnic minorities Social businesses Worker or community-owned cooperatives.

Indirect approaches involve the inclusion of social clauses (for example, employment targets for long-term unemployed or people from disadvantaged backgrounds, or targets to provide training through apprenticeships) in traditional or regular contracts with private sector providers, as well as screening supply chains based on a variety of ethical considerations (McNeill, 2015). For example, in construction projects, social procurement may involve construction companies specifying Fair trade products. Alternatively,

Social value in procurement  109 it may require that subcontractors and suppliers not only deliver traditional products and services, but also provide employment opportunities for disadvantaged and marginalised groups such as people with ­disabilities, ex- offenders, ethnic minorities, or the long-term unemployed (Loosemore, 2016). Public sector frameworks are also an important mechanism for e mbedding social value into procurement (see Chapter 8). Social procurement is becoming an increasingly important requirement in the delivery of private and public sector construction projects across the world, although current practice tends to be confined to low-value construction activities with a focus on risk mitigation rather than opportunity maximisation (Loosemore and Reid, 2019). The built environment has significant potential to deliver social value to the communities in which it builds using social procurement, for example, though work and employment, supply chain activities, engaging social enterprises and building capacity and collaboration among public, private, and third sector organisations. We discuss work and employment dimensions in Chapters 4 and 5, whilst Chapter 8 explores cross-sector collaborations. In this chapter, we focus on the supply chain and approaches to engaging social enterprises. Social Value UK (Manning, 2021) highlights how holding open pre-market discussions provides a specific way in which organisations can start to introduce social value in procurement:

• • • •

•

Build social value into your contract registers – supply the right information and give enough time for planning and creation of partnerships and systems Deliver training for local businesses – help them to respond meaningfully. Use local business connections (for example, Chambers of Commerce) throughout the process Have clear, enforceable criteria with weighting – do your systems and documents include social value? Can you enforce what you’re asking for? Ask the right questions – by using the ‘principles model’ (see Chapter 14) you and your suppliers will have the framework for measuring, managing, and maximising the social value you create Encourage innovation – expect your suppliers to change and develop the services they provide and build this into the service lifecycle. Be careful to avoid stifling innovation through over-specifying how to deliver the contract; getting feedback from users on a regular basis will provide opportunities to innovate.

110  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Social procurement should not be seen as something relevant only for public sector or large private sector organisations. Small and micro firms can include social clauses in contracts too, for example, in subcontracting services as we show through an example of a micro firm, JA Building Services Ltd.

JA Building Services Ltd JA Building Services Ltd is an owner-operated micro firm that specialises in domestic construction, refurbishment, and renovation work in the East Midlands region of the UK (see https://www.ja-building-services-ltd.com/). Operating for over 35 years, the business model has been refined to take advantage of local market opportunities and provide customer-focused building services. A partnership model is at the heart of how the Director of JA Building Services works in collaboration with architects, planning officials, customers, and subcontractors. Each subcontractor that the company employs on site is carefully selected to make sure that they not only offer the same high-quality service that JA Building Services seek to provide, but also that they are able to collectively create social value through the supply chain. For example, all the current electrical, plumbing and heating, roofing, and joinery subcontractors are local firms who each have an apprentice in training. JA Building Services also seeks to offer opportunities for subcontract-work to self-employed people who come from disadvantaged areas in the region, such as Mansfield where unemployment in persistently higher and average earnings significantly lower than in other parts of the country. Where possible, the company works with the same contractors, to offer them continuity of work, and help build healthy long-term relationships. JA Building Services drives to continuously reduce waste, recycle, and reuse materials (adopting circular business models, which we discuss in Chapter 7), and they extend this approach to their supply chain. The local materials suppliers, including a family run builder’s merchants who are committed to improving the environmental performance of all their business activities, actively encourage their business partners and wider community to do the same. This business model has helped the company continually provide the highest level of building services, importantly providing increased flexibility to amend designs to suit in-situ requirements or customer-derived changes during the construction phase. In turn, this business model has provided them with two crucial business benefits: countless repeat business and customer referrals. In terms of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), they meet SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth, targets 8.3, to promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent

Social value in procurement  111 job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalisation and growth of micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises; and target 8.6, to substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education, or training. Also, in relation to SDG 12 Responsible consumption and production, they work towards target 12.5, to reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling, and reuse. For further information on social procurement, see European Commission (2021) Social procurement, https://ec.europa.eu/info/ policies/public-procurement/tools-public-buyers/social-procurement_en McNeill, J. (2015) INSIGHTS into Social Procurement: From Policy to Practice, Melbourne: Social Procurement Australasia

Social enterprises and social businesses Social enterprises operate at the intersection of business and society, engaging in commercial activities with the aim of benefiting specific groups of people in the community, such as the unemployed, people with disabilities, and those from disadvantaged backgrounds (Loosemore and Higgon, 2015). At heart, social enterprises are ‘hybrid’ organisations which trade in the open market for a social or environmental purpose. One of their key characteristics is that the majority of their profits go back to the communities and causes they are set up to serve. Engaging social enterprises and social businesses within the construction supply chain and wider built environment contracts, such as facilities management and service-provision, is extremely beneficial for a number of reasons: • • • • • • • • • •

They are mission-driven with a big vision They are often small and agile They operate close to local communities and thus understand the contextual conditions and specific issues They deliver innovative solutions to local problems They tend to employ diverse workforce Their business activities tend to benefit specific groups of people, for example, young, people with disabilities, or ex-offenders Their performance measurement is focused on the social impact created (not profit) They offer an opportunity to diversify the supply chain They offer an opportunity to co-create social value and establish longterm presence and benefits Collectively social enterprises and social businesses help realise and embed change over the long-term and create a ripple effect that trickles social value into communities. The social enterprise sector is an especially powerful part of the economy (Social Enterprise UK, 2018).

112  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Social entrepreneurs tend to have a particularly strong sense of right and wrong, of altruism and empathy with others who may be less fortunate than themselves, of accountability and responsibility to their communities, and of moral outrage against injustice and inequity in society (Dees, 2001; Yujuico, 2008; Abu-Saifan, 2012). For social entrepreneurs, wealth creation and profit-making is a means to address a pressing and intractable social or environmental problem, rather than as an end in itself. There are many different types of opportunities to engage with social enterprises in creating social value as they are as wide and varied as any other type of business. For example, they can be involved throughout the supply chain in various ways such as trade-based organisations, subcontractors, recycling firms, stationary suppliers, and media companies. Research shows that social enterprises are more likely to be led by women or ethnic minorities (Social Enterprise UK, 2019). In a sector grappling with diversity, partnering with social enterprises is one useful way of empowering different sections of the community to engage with the built environment. By using them in the supply chain, companies can diversify who they procure key business services from, whilst doing good. Importantly, working with these organisations supports them in employing people normally excluded from the construction sector and helps them tackle some of society’s most pressing problems such as homelessness, unemployment, offending, and disability. Alongside the growth of social enterprises, social businesses are also emerging as an attractive hybrid form of an organisation that utilises market-based approaches to social value creation. As stated, a social business is a commercial business with social objectives at its core. The key is that the business exists for a social purpose, although unlike social enterprises there is no requirement for the majority of profits to be reinvested in that business’s cause. People and institutions invest in a social business purely for social purposes, not personal profit. Investors can gradually recoup the money they invest in the enterprise, but they do not take any profits beyond that point. Social businesses therefore combine organisational objectives and values associated with for-profit and non-profit activities, which have traditionally been considered contradictory and thus represent powerful social innovation (Wilson and Post, 2013). As such, this represents a model for a humane form of capitalism. Social businesses are distinguishable from charities in that, although they are social-objective-driven, they operate on a self-sustaining basis and enjoy the potential for growth and expansion (Yunus, 2007: 23). Certified B Corporations are an increasingly popular way of balancing purpose and profit. They are legally required to consider how their decisions impact their workers, customers, suppliers, community, and the environment. This global movement, using business for good, is active in 150 countries and driving a shift from shareholder primacy to stakeholder capitalism.

Social value in procurement  113 For further information, see https://bcorporation.net/ Social enterprises and social businesses can be included in the supply chain through top-down approaches to social procurement (as we show in Figure 6.2), where the activity is driven by the strategic objectives of the organisation. Willmott Dixon, for example, has a strategic commitment to engaging social enterprises on all their sites (see Chapter 10). Equally, many valuable social value initiatives are ad hoc or driven by localised interests, for example, in relation to a particular project or a geographical location, as we show in Figure 6.3 (for an example, see Chapter 12). For further information about social enterprises and social businesses, see Loosemore, M. and Higgon, D. (2015) Social enterprise in the construction industry: Building better communities, Abingdon: Routledge. Raiden, A., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (2019) Chapter 9: Latch, Canopy, and CITU, Leeds, UK: Three unique SME’s providing secure housing, in Social Value in Construction, Abingdon: Routledge. Yunus, M. (2007) Creating a world without poverty – Social business and the future of capitalism, New York: Public Affairs.

Figure 6.2 Top-down scheme to social procurement.

Figure 6.3 Bottom-up approach to social procurement.

114  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Chapter summary In this chapter, we have discussed the role that social procurement can play in considering, delivering, and creating social value. We have outlined both direct and indirect approaches to developing social procurement policy and practice. By drawing on an exemplar case of a micro firm in the UK that delivers social value through the supply chain, we demonstrate how social procurement is relevant beyond public sector bodies and large contracting organisations. We have presented both top-down and bottom-up models for developing social procurement practice and highlight the benefits of engaging with social enterprises and social businesses. Our discussion related to a range of SDGs, specifically 8 Decent work and economic growth, 10 Reduced inequalities, 12 Responsible consumption and production, and 17 Partnership for the goals.

References Abu-Saifan, S. (2012) Social entrepreneurship: Definition and boundaries. Technology Innovation Management Review, February, 22–27. Dees, J.G. (2001) The meaning of social entrepreneurship, Durham, NC: Duke University, Fuqua School of Business, Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship. Loosemore, M. (2016) Social procurement in UK construction projects, International Journal of Project Management, 34, 133–144. Loosemore, M. and Higgon, D. (2015) Social enterprise in the construction industry: Building better communities, Abingdon: Routledge. Loosemore, M. and Reid, S. (2019) The social procurement practices of tier-one construction contractors in Australia, Construction Management and Economics, 37(4), 183–200. Manning, C. (2021) Maximising social value through your procurement, Social Value UK, https://socialvalueuk.org/maximising-social-value-procurement/ [accessed 21 April 2021]. McNeill, J. (2015) INSIGHTS into social procurement: From policy to practice, Melbourne: Social Procurement Australasia. NEC (2020) NEC4: Alliance Contract (ALC), London: NEC Contracts, https:// www.neccontract.com/NEC4-Products/NEC4-Contracts/NEC4-AllianceContract [accessed 21 April 2021]. Social Enterprise UK (2018) The hidden revolution, https://www.socialenterprise.org. uk/policy-and-research-reports/the-hidden-revolution/ [accessed 3 June 2020]. Social Enterprise UK (2019) Front and centre: Putting social value at the heart of inclusive growth, https://www.socialenterprise.org.uk/policy-and-researchreports/front-and-centre-putting-social-value-at-the-heart-of-inclusive-growth/ [accessed 3 June 2020]. Wilson, F. and Post, J.E. (2013) Business models for people, planet (& profits): Exploring the phenomena of social business, a market- based approach to social value creation. Small Business Economics, 40, 715–737. Yujuico, E. (2008) Connecting the dots in social entrepreneurship through the capabilities approach. Socio-Economic Review, 6(3), 493–513. Yunus, M. (2007) Creating a world without poverty – social business and the future of capitalism, New York: Public Affairs.

7

Circular economy Delivering social value throughout the supply chain Emmanuel Manu, Nii Ankrah, and Jamila Bentrar

A circular economy comprises business models that replace the linear (take-make-dispose) economy with the alternative of reducing, alternatively reusing, and recycling materials in production, distribution, and consumption processes. In this chapter, we consider different circular business models, and present three case studies (two in the UK and one in France) to showcase how social value is created by (i) the localised nature of circular business opportunities, driven by the need for shorter circular resource flow loops to minimise secondary production costs; (ii) opportunities for the establishment of new supply chain start-ups

• • • •

Innovation and new business models New business opportunities Local spend Employment opportunities and skills

•

Diversification and establishment of new supply chain start-ups to produce circular products through innovation Circular design and construction Digital sharing platforms

• •

• • • •

• • • •

Shorter circular resource flow loopsand minimised secondary production costs Reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery of materials Product and materials life cycle extension Energy recovery

Whole supply chain configuration Architects and engineers designing to meet client and constructor needs and with end of life requirements in mind Investors and developers opting for circular designs and tendering Suppliers and distributorsoffering circular materials

Figure 7.1 Circular economy and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-9

116  Emmanuel Manu et al. to produce circular products through innovation; and (iii) the health and well-being benefits of reduced emissions. We also present a practical insight from a developer and show how the circular vision and social value relate to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 8 Decent work and economic growth, 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, 12 Responsible consumption and production, and 17 Partnerships for the goals.

Circular economy A circular economy is an economic model for promoting continuous use of resources to avoid them degenerating into waste. This vision seeks to accomplish sustainable development by reducing, alternatively reusing, and recycling materials in production, distribution, and consumption processes, and creating environmental quality, economic prosperity, and social equity, for the benefit of current and future generations (Kirchherr et al., 2017: 224–225). Such a vision can be achieved through business models that help to intensify the utilised resources by continually preserving or enhancing the quality, integrity, and value of materials over the longer-term. As shown in Figure 7.2, a circular economy therefore offers an alternative to the linear (take-make-dispose) economy model which relies on the use of sometimes scarce and finite natural resources for products that easily loose value and end up as waste. Within a circular economy, materials and components have to be intentionally designed for reuse and recycling. It requires all the necessary structures for ensuring that products or projects, and the materials used in their manufacture, or construction, are continuously reintegrated as resources in a circular flow.

Figure 7.2 Linear and circular economy.

Circular economy  117 The aim within circular economy is to bridge the gap between production and consumption activities (Witjes and Lozano, 2016) by keeping materials in their highest integrity as valuable and useful resources for (re)production (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2015).

Circular supply chain The term ‘circular supply chain’ has emerged as an approach for ensuring that the supply chain generates business value by managing the flow of resources within a circular economy, whilst at the same time achieving environmental and social value. Schraven et al. (2019) highlight that bringing about change when implementing circular supply chains needs to take into account the mutual dependency of supply chain actors, which means that each party has a tendency to look up to others as having responsibility for driving change. This dependence of the recycled aggregate supply chain on others for circular economy transition was also linked to the need to ensure external support for the supply chain, such as investment in new technologies which could improve the quality of products created from recycled materials, and boost supply (from demolishers) and demand (from concrete producers, contractors, and designers). Tingley et al. (2017) also propose that to improve the rates of structural steel reuse within a circular economy, a database for tracking suppliers, including their location and the availability of steel sections available, is needed. They also suggest that the links between demolition contractors and stockists will also need to be strengthened in addition to more technical guidance and education for the construction industry focused on structural steel reuse. To justify the need for transition to a circular economy, Nasir et al. (2017) use a life cycle assessment approach to compare the carbon emissions of insulation materials from a circular supply chain (produced from recycled textile) with a product from a linear supply chain (stone wool insulation produced from molten rock) and report on the environmental benefits of the circular supply chain. Their analysis shows that carbon emissions from the linear stone wool insulation supply chain (1.5090kgCO2-eq) were 64.02% higher than that of the circular recycled textile insulation supply chain (0.9200kgCO2-eq). From an economic perspective, the World Economic Forum has estimated that adoption of a circular model will contribute about US$100bn a year through an increase in global construction industry productivity (Arup, 2016).

Circular vision and social value Social value is integral to the circular vision where social value refers to the benefits that are created for the society beyond those received directly by the individuals or organisations that generated the value (after Auerswald, 2009). Within the circular model, it is transformation within organisations and

118  Emmanuel Manu et al. their processes that achieve social value through value creation that will determine the extent to which social value benefits can be sustained. Such intra-organisational transformations that are conducive to social value creation, and yet also generate business or financial value, will ultimately extend across individual organisational boundaries during procurement too. In this way, social value is not an ‘added value’. Since the environment, health, well-being, and economic sustenance of people in society are at the heart of many social value creation efforts, the circular model aligns well with business goals and the organisational pursuit of social value. In particular, the circular vision aligns well with social value benefits because successful circular business models tend to be local in nature and these local supply chains strengthen local economies. Social enterprises are beginning to offer specialised labour for local deconstruction activities, and

Figure 7.3 Social value creation in the construction supply chain through circular economy adoption.

Circular economy  119 new start-up firms are beginning to emerge through circular innovation, all creating the opportunities for new skills and training opportunities to drive a circular economy – circular jobs (see Figure 7.3). We now outline the steps that practitioners can start to take in order to align their business operations with the circular vision.

Circular strategies: reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery There are various circular strategies, for example, those proposed by Morseletto (2020) who developed a nuanced list of ten circular strategies: recover, reuse, recycling, repurpose, refurbish, remanufacture, repair, reduce, rethink, and refuse. Most models and frameworks converge around ‘4Rs’ linked to reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery activities however (Kirchherr et al., 2017). Reduction is about increasing the efficiency in product manufacture or use by consuming fewer natural resources and materials. Reuse is about anther consumer reusing discarded product or component which is still in good condition and fulfils its original function. Recycling refers to the processing of materials to obtain the same (highgrade) or lower (low-grade) quality, though arriving at a lower-grade quality material has been referred to as downcycling and a higher-grade quality material as upcycling. Recovery focuses on incineration of material with the aim of energy recovery (see Table 7.1).

Circular business models New circular business models that the construction supply chain can adopt to transition their business operations from linear to circular are beginning to emerge. A business model is an understanding of the logic and strategy that a firm uses to identify, create, and deliver value to their clients/customers, whilst maintaining a viable structure of revenue and cost in alignment with their business priorities (Teece, 2010). Circular business models are driven by circular economy strategies, practices, and actions. BAM and ARUP (2017) categorised circular business models that are applicable to the built environment into circular design (and construction), circular use, and circular recovery. We highlight eight circular business models in Table 7.2: circular design, circular construction, product as a service, life cycle extensions, sharing platforms, end-of-life management, circular material production and supply (distribution), and energy recovery models, and link them to the abovementioned circular strategies (after BAM and ARUP, 2017; Esposito et al., 2018; EIT Climate-KIC, 2019; Morseletto, 2020). The circular business models are all driven by value identification, addition, and capture throughout the life cycle of built assets, a vision that can inherently also result in the generation of social value.

120  Emmanuel Manu et al. Table 7.1 Circular strategies (after Kirchherr et al., 2017; Potting et al., 2017; Morseletto, 2020) 4Rs

10 circular strategies

Reduce – Refusing, rethinking, redesigning (including prolonging the lifespan of products), minimisation, reduction, prevention of resource use and/or preserving of natural capital

Refuse – Make products redundant by abandoning its function or by offering the same function with a radically different product

Reuse – Reusing, closing the loop, cycling, repairing and/or refurbishing of resources

Reuse – Reuse by anther consumer of discarded product which is still in good condition and fulfils its original function Repair – Repair and maintenance of defective product so it can be used with its original function Refurbish – Restore an old product and bring it up to date Remanufacture – Use parts of discarded product in a new product with the same function Repurpose – Use discarded products or its part in a new product with a different function Recycle – Process materials to obtain the same (high-grade) or lower (lowgrade) quality Recovery – Incineration of material with energy recovery

Recycle – Remanufacturing, recycling, closing the loop, cycling and/or reuse of waste Recovery – Incineration of materials with energy recovery

Rethink – Make product use more intensive (for example, through sharing products or by putting multifunctional products on market) Reduce – Increase efficiency in product manufacture or use by consuming fewer natural resources

Circular design model Circular designs involve the use of products, systems, and built structures that are designed to last longer, are easier to maintain, repair, upgrade, refurbish, remanufacture, or recycle, with a prioritisation of new materials from bio-based sources that are less resource-intensive or fully recyclable (BAM and ARUP, 2017). Therefore, circular designs need to prioritise the use of circular construction techniques (for example, design for manufacture, assembly, and disassembly) as well as specify the use of building products that are circular in nature. The construction of demountable buildings that can easily be dismantled for reuse starts with circular design (ING, 2017). To achieve circular design, organisations and practitioners operating within the design space (for example, architects and engineers) will need to

Circular economy  121 Table 7.2  Circular economy strategies and business models Project life cycle Circular strategy

Description

Smarter design and construction

Phase-out materials (for Circular design example, virgin materials) or model – design of environmentally damaging product, projects, production processes by and process for the abandoning their function or circular economy. offering the same function Circular construction with a different material. model– construction for easy disassembly Design and construction of built assets that facilitate other R strategies so that intensity of use and efficiency is increased (for example, design for disassembly, design for flexibility and adaptability). Design and construction of built assets so that they consume fewer natural resources.

Refuse

Rethink

Reduce

Extend lifespan of built assets

Reuse

Repair

Refurbish

Useful application of materials

Circular business models

Reuse built assets or their Product as a service component parts, which are model still in good condition, to Sharing platforms fulfil original function. model Life cycle extension Repair and maintenance of model – repurpose, defective products so that refurbish and they can be used for their maintenance original function. Restore built assets and their components to bring them up to date.

Remanufacture

Use parts of discarded components, or parts from built assets, in the construction of new projects with the same function.

Repurpose

Adapt built assets for different purposes, or use parts of discarded components from built assets, in the construction of new projects with different functions. Process materials from built End-of-life assets to obtain the same management model or higher-grade quality raw – deconstruction of materials. built assets. Circular material production and supply model – production and supply of recycled/ upcycled materials Incineration of material with Energy recovery model energy recovery. – waste-to- energy.

Recycle and Upcycle

Recovery

122  Emmanuel Manu et al. first develop awareness of the circular economy concept. This awareness will help them adopt design practices that intentionally depend less on virgin materials by replacing these with healthy and circular alternatives. One of the key steps that can be taken in this regard is for architects and engineers to undertake continuing professional development (CPD) courses on the circular economy, circular business models, and the circular materials and products that can be specified for projects (for example, Cradle to Cradle Certified Products Registry). Designers will also need to start engaging more with demolition/deconstruction specialists during the design stage to evaluate and better understand the end-of-life impact of their designs. They can then alter designs to improve the deconstruction and circularity potential of the assets they design. Engineers will have to work more closely with material scientists and chemists who are constantly researching and discovering new circular innovative materials and products for testing, certification, and use in built assets. Architects and engineers should also think more critically about their designs by exploring options that prolong the lifespan and use of the built assets through flexible and easily adaptable and reconfigurable structures, whilst achieving easy disassembly when these assets ultimately reach their end of life. Architects and engineers with expertise in designing flexible and easily adaptable structures that respond to the requirements of a circular economy will ultimately become more attractive to clients. This is because clients are increasingly becoming aware that their built assets retain better value in a circular economy, despite the increasingly unpredictable future characterised by constantly changing use requirements over a building’s lifetime (for example, commercial office to student accommodation to hotel accommodation to residential accommodation). A circular economy will be an attractive model to help clients future-proof their investment. Project managers that work at the front-end of projects, helping clients define project requirements and scope, will also need to develop more awareness of circular economy and the kind of requirement that can be defined for projects. Circular construction model The circular construction model is based on the use of construction techniques and processes (for example, construction assembly and installation) that achieve circularity (reuse and recycling) of the structure (ING, 2017). This can best be achieved if the entire construction supply chain works together (ibid). Prefabrication and off-site construction are techniques that can help achieve circularity (Esposito et al., 2018). Construction firms and specialist subcontractors will have to develop greater awareness of assembly techniques that facilitate a circular economy. These techniques will mostly revolve around assembly of prefabricated modular systems and digital production. Contractors and subcontractors will also have to undertake CPD

Circular economy  123 training to update their knowledge on the use of new and emerging circular construction materials so that they are best placed to work with these materials should they be specified for projects. This will also give circular economy-enabled supply chain firms a competitive advantage in tender competitions where circular requirements have been specified. Product as a service model The product as a service model is based on consumers (clients and end users) purchasing the services required from building products as against buying and retaining ownership of these products (EIT Climate-KIC, 2019). Unlike product-oriented business models where firms have an incentive to maximise the number of products sold to make profit, firms operating a product as a service business model generate profits from the services offered by their products, whilst the material products and consumables become cost factors that need to be efficiently managed (Tukker, 2015). Demountable partitions could be sold as a service to clients per m2; lighting could be sold per lux. For example, Rau Architects and Philips have pioneered the circular lighting concept in the Netherlands whereby Philips supplies and sells lighting as a service to Rau Architects per lux at affordable rates (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017). Philips then retains the ownership of the lighting installations and provides the specified lighting levels in the architectural studio at competitive rates so that Rau Architects are exempt from any other costs related to their lighting needs. To make this model profitable, Philips had to ensure that they supplied efficient lighting systems to meet specifications and minimise cost. There is potential for more supply chains in the construction sector to offer competitive packages by selling their products as a service which will be justifiable due to the increasingly changing use requirements for built assets. Sharing platforms model The sharing model helps to increase the utilisation rate of goods and resources through selling, renting, sharing, and exchange of materials and products (BAM and ARUP, 2017; EIT Climate-KIC, 2019). Digital platforms can be used to enable interconnectivities between multiple clients/customers, supplier to client, or supplier to supplier by tracking, mapping, and matching local demand for idle and/or unwanted resources. This business model promotes an increased utilisation of existing resources and a reduction in demand for new products. A typical example of such digital platforms that facilitate resource sharing is FLOOW2, which allows contractors with idle construction equipment (for example, earth diggers and excavators) to maximise equipment utilisation through sharing or exchanges (Esposito et al., 2018). Another example is the Materials Exchange Platform Map (MEP Map), which has been launched by the Supply Chain Sustainability School in the UK (CIOB, 2020). This platform allows contractors and their suppliers to freely map and

124  Emmanuel Manu et al. locally exchange unused construction materials through a central database. These digital enablers of the circular economy in the construction industry will continue to grow, with an increasing potential for new supply chain firms to emerge and provide more sophisticated digital mapping services, to drive both the sharing model and the product as the service model. The rest of the construction supply chain will, however, only need to develop awareness of how these digital platforms will influence their procurement functions, as the switch from buying products to buying the services that products provide continues to advance and become mainstream. Life cycle extension model – repurpose, refurbish, and maintenance The life cycle extension model involves active maintenance, repair, upgrading, remanufacturing, and remarketing of products, components, and systems, including entire built assets (BAM and ARUP, 2017; EIT Climate-KIC, 2019). The aim is to extend the service life, integrity and quality of the products, components and systems that are used in built assets (BAM and ARUP, 2017) so that the value of the entire asset is preserved or enhanced. The constantly changing use of built assets will also continue to increase demand for construction services to adapt and extend the lifespan of these assets. As such, demand for supply chain firms that have expertise in extending the lifespan of built assets through active maintenance regimes, repairs, upgrades, and refurbishments will continue to grow. Firms that specialise in refurbishment works will therefore need to develop greater awareness of the circular economy and the use of material passports to define the characteristics of materials and their pathways within a circular flow. They will also need to develop more expertise in the use of digital tools that facilitate tracking and circulation of materials within a local circular flow loop or ecosystem. End-of-life management model The end-of-life management model is a circular business model that focuses on deconstructing built assets at their end-of-life phase. Demolition specialists that operate in this space will first need to re-orient their perspectives from demolition and waste management experts to deconstruction and resource management experts. These firms will need to develop an awareness of built assets as material banks that need to be mined for their resources, rather than managing these assets as waste liabilities. Increasingly, specially trained labour forces will be required to carefully dismantle and separate end-of-life materials from the built assets. This labour force will need to be competent in the use of advanced dismantling and separation process, including the use of material passports and other digital informatics during pre-deconstruction audits. For example, Akanbi et al. (2020) have developed a decision support tool for predicting demolition waste in a circular economy. This artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tool can help deconstruction specialists

Circular economy  125 to quickly predict the quantity of resources in a built asset earmarked for demolition, mobilise the supply chains that will need to be engaged prior to actual demolition, and identify the storage and logistics requirements in a timely fashion. There are also opportunities for construction supply chains that operate as social entrepreneurs to train and offer labour with specialised expertise in dismantling and deconstructing materials, fittings, appliances, and components (for example, bricks, sanitary appliances, mechanical and electrical fittings) from built assets for reuse or recycling. Circular material production and supply model The circular material production and supply model is driven by recycling or upcycling of used (non-virgin) materials that would otherwise have resulted in waste – ensuring that these materials become useful resources again. The circular supply aspect of this business model also focuses on the development of new bio-based materials that are less resource-intensive, enhance renewable energy and are fully recyclable (BAM and ARUP, 2017). Through secondary production, these used materials are re-produced as resources for the same product (recycling) or a higher-grade product (upcycling). Supply chain firms that re-process used materials through secondary production or supply recycled and upcycled materials for construction will be paramount in the transition of the construction industry towards a circular economy. Some of these secondary production activities can be energy-intensive and will not be truly circular if the carbon equivalent of the energy required for recycling (haulage, re-processing, and distribution) exceeds the embodied carbon in the recycled materials. For this reason, circular material production and distribution should also extend to supply chain firms that specialise in the capture, storage, and recycling of waste energy (for example, waste heat). For example, EcoStock, a start-up organisation in France, has designed a mobile thermal storage solution that enables recovery of industrial waste heat through storage in recycled ceramics devices for later use as a heating source or for electricity generation (Ecotechceram, n.d.). There are also opportunities for other supply chain start-ups that specialise in the capture and sale of waste energy within a circular economy. Energy recovery model The energy recovery model is arguably the least circular as it involves the recovery of energy by degenerating the value of the materials that would have ended up as waste. These are achieved through waste-to-energy processes to extract energy as the only valuable resource left in these materials for which they would otherwise have gone to landfill. According to some (Van Caneghem et al., 2019; Morseletto, 2020), energy recovery through wasteto-energy processes is compatible and complimentary with recycling in a circular economy. Others (Rollinson and Oladejo, 2019; Vilella, 2019) have affirmed that this is the least sustainable of the circular business models

126  Emmanuel Manu et al. because it destroys materials forever and encourages waste of scarce natural resources. Until built assets are better designed for deconstruction, this business model will still be required to compliment the other circular business models.

Circular vision for a construction supply chain The realisation of a circular vision in construction will require construction supply chain firms to understand the circular economy strategies (reduction, reuse, recycling, and recovery), the circular business models, and how they are linked so that they can begin to consider and then adopt the best fit to their business purpose. Ultimately, a combination of a specific circular strategy (or strategies) and relevant circular business model(s) that fit an organisation’s business purpose help achieve a configuration of a circular supply chain. The supply chain plays a vital role in the construction industry in general and is understandably central to adopting a circular economy. Where the traditional linear supply chain model is unsustainable and wasteful, the circular vision offers a useful alternative model. The conceptualisation of a circular construction supply chain begins with designs that are dismountable and specification of products that have been carefully designed to drive a circular economy. Construction clients and investors will then opt for circular built assets that retain and even enhance the value of their assets over time, which can be achieved by specifying procurement and tendering requirements that prioritise circular economy targets. In turn, contractors will bring in expertise in circular construction methods and the use of circular building materials. Suppliers of basic low-tech building materials (for example, masonry) will offer circular building products with a material passport that specify their circular pathway, whilst suppliers of high-tech building materials, components, and systems (boilers, ventilation systems, and the like) will adopt innovative service-oriented models as a leased package to provide a service, in addition to full maintenance responsibility at competitive prices for both clients and suppliers. Demolition specialists adopt deconstruction practices that at present will be more challenging because most of the built assets that have reached their end of life were not intentionally designed for deconstruction. Whilst this remains a challenge, smarter approaches to demolition can result in valuable highgrade building materials that can be reused or recycled. These demolition specialists will also diversify into recycling specialists and urban miners with expertise in applying cutting edge technologies and innovations in transforming deconstructed materials into valuable resources as required. Distributors and builders’ merchants operate as a link between new building projects and building material  banks,  facilitated  by  material  passports  that  enable

Circular economy  127 information on the value of these materials, as resources, to be distributed to their next point of use. The circular supply chain requires and produces information and materials that flow in a circular manner so that architects and engineers are designing to meet the requirements of end-of-life supply chain actors (for example, deconstruction and recycling firms) whilst also specifying the use of materials from the circular flow into the projects they design. The key message to the construction supply chain is that through circular strategies and circular business models, circular disruption will continue to happen gradually in the industry and practitioners within the supply chain that start to take the necessary steps now will eventually become the disruptors rather than the disrupted. Innovative thinking, the flexibility, and boldness to adapt to change by applying new techniques and processes will be central to future-proofing businesses that operate within the construction supply chain. The transition towards a circular economy will not be devoid of risk, but the focus on long-term rewards should be the priority. We present three case studies to demonstrate how the pursuit of circular business models can be profitable and at the same time generate social value and achieve selected SDGs.

AR Demolition and Aggregate Recycling, UK AR Demolition and Aggregate Recycling is a UK-based organisation with two subsidiaries: one that specialises in demolition, and the other in aggregate recycling and supply. Their business model is well aligned with both the end-of-life management (deconstruction of built assets) and circular material production and distribution (production and supply of recycled/ upcycled materials) models presented in Table 7.2. To produce the recycled aggregates, the demolished waste is first crushed, screened, and then re-processed and graded for reuse in the construction industry as sub-base material, void filling material and for manufacture of pavement concrete. A snapshot of this process is illustrated in Figure 7.4.

Figure 7.4 Stages of the aggregate recycling process in Company A

128  Emmanuel Manu et al. The firm operates a range of plants at their main aggregate recycling facility. Initially, they began by recycling demolition waste from their own demolition activities, but soon scaled up to accept free demolition waste from the local area to generate the economies of scale needed to keep the facility profitable. After a few years, they transitioned from receiving free demolition waste from other demolition contractors to paying for the demolition waste that is brought to their facility for recycling. This was to achieve the required volume for operational efficiency of their growing recycling facility as explained below: We collect it [construction waste], and we pay them for it, it probably costs us by the time we’ve finished, we’ve got to buy it in, and then we’ve got to crush it, and process it and sell it, so, our biggest concern is….just getting enough volume to keep the plant running. (Managing Director, AR Demolition and Aggregate Recycling) The rate that has been set for purchasing the demolition waste from other local firms still ensures that they are able to sell on the recycled aggregates for a profit. For the business model to be economically viable, the firm also ensures that a shorter material flow loop is achieved to keep transportation and logistics costs to a minimum. To achieve this, they only transport demolished materials from a 25-mile radius to their facility for processing and recycling. They otherwise deploy a mobile recycling plant if the demolition subsidiary has a job that is outside of this 25-mile radius. This mobile plant still crushes, screens, and re-processes the aggregates at the demolished site, which is then supplied to their existing network of recycled aggregate users for new construction activities locally. Whilst this operational emphasis on a shorter resource flow loop was a cost minimisation exercise, it also minimises the carbon emissions from hauling demolition waste across longer distances, which would increase whole-life carbon. This case study shows that a truly circular supply chain will operate within shorter, and hence local, material flow loops to create both financial and economic value, with the localised approach also driving social value creation. In an era where globalised supply chains have had a negative effect on local economies, this emphasis on shorter circular resource flow loops can contribute to social value by boosting local spend and job creation. For further information, see https://www.ardemolition.co.uk/our-services/ ar-aggregates

Circular economy  129

Thermal Recycling, UK Thermal Recycling is a start-up firm that has pioneered a new innovative approach for safe recycling of asbestos. Their business model is aligned with the circular material production and distribution (production and supply of recycled/upcycled materials) model presented in Table 7.2. The asbestos material is upcycled into other higher-grade masonry products. To achieve this, the asbestos is put through a thermal treatment process that transforms this naturally occurring, but harmful product into a harmless inert material for other production processes (asbestos de-naturing). This asbestos denaturing technique had previously been achieved at a laboratory scale on a fibre-by-fibre basis in the 70s but had never been achieved at scale (denaturing asbestos in large packs). The firm has commissioned the kiln plant shown in Figure 7.5, which is the world’s first for achieving this process on a large scale as the Managing Director explains: We created that quantum leap, and now we’re looking to replicate that quantum leap again and again and again. So, that was a real buzz, to be able to take something that people have tried and not managed to do but then trusting that the science does make sense, we just need to be diligent, scale it correctly, thinking about the engineering…you know. (Managing Director, Thermal Recycling) The successful development of this patented asbestos recycling plant is a transformational innovation that will potentially create financial value, environmental value, and new training and employment opportunities. With the limited number of landfill cells in the UK, there is a significant potential for setting up other local asbestos recycling plants across the UK and other international markets to minimise the carbon footprint of the asbestos recycling activities. At present, the only other alternative is to transport asbestos from the hundreds of asbestos transfer stations up and down the UK to one of only three remaining landfill cells. This requires journeys estimated at around 140 miles to the nearest landfill cell from most parts of the UK, representing an almost 300-mile round trip. The inert output from this treatment process, which has no asbestos content, is used to produce building aggregates and other alternative masonry products (upcycling). The firm has been granted an Environment Agency permit to treat an estimated 29,500 tonnes of asbestos per year. Through this innovation, Thermal Recycling now has the potential to create more new jobs and provide new skills and training for working on this recycling plant. This was acknowledged prior to commissioning of the plant:

130  Emmanuel Manu et al.

Figure 7.5 Asbestos de-naturing plant for recycling asbestos.

So, our kiln is going to be installed at the end of the month. From there we will be running our commissioning processes where the kiln is set up and then all firing cycles are determined and then from that we will be looking to ramp up and engage with contractors and bringing in specific jobs. (Managing Director, Thermal Recycling) This is a clear example of new supply chain start-ups that can produce circular products through innovation, leading to new job opportunities and support for livelihoods whilst at the same time solving environmental problems whilst creating financial value. The development and testing of this innovation also benefited from external government support in the form of Research and Development (R&D) funding. There is an opportunity for more supply chain firms that will pioneer various other innovative recycling solutions. Such firms will also be aware that pioneering new solutions requires patience to achieve successful prototypes, going through rigorous testing and certification processes before getting to the point where full-scale commercial production can commence. For further information, see https://www.thermalrecycling.co.uk/ https://w w w.ther malrecycling.co.uk/storage/media/content/f iles/ ARCA%20NEWS%20Recycling%20article.pdf

Upcyclea, France Upcyclea is a start-up in France that operates a digital collaborative platform which enables the efficient management of resources from built assets in a circular flow. Their business model is aligned with the sharing platforms model presented in Table 7.2. This digital platform combines big data analytics and AI algorithms to generate informatics that help clients manage their assets in a circular economy. It utilises data on healthy and circular products, digital bank of materials imported from building data, including BIM data, and details of all the stakeholders on the platform (for example,

Circular economy  131 architects, manufacturers, contractors, suppliers) as the input to data to map out local material flows and connect the various stakeholders via reuse or upcycling ecosystems. The subscription-based digital platform also has a functionality for valuation of built assets within a circular economy based on key input parameters related to the existing asset (for example, BIM model, material inventory of the asset). This provides building owners and planners with a measure of the circularity potential (measuring the environmental and economic performance) of the asset and its residual value for decision making purposes. The AI algorithm also maps material flows to local demand to create an optimised ecosystem of resource flow that minimises the associated carbon footprint. This case is a good example of the enabling role that digital technologies will play in the transition of the construction supply chain towards a circular economy. There will continue to be opportunities for other supply chain start-ups in the construction sector that provide various other digital platforms to support the various circular economy business models. For further information, see https://www.upcyclea.com/en/

Marga Pérez, Lanzarote Marga Pérez is an artist and sustainable developer who looks to engage others in the circular economy through ‘creativity not consumption’ philosophy and practice, and the creative and transformative process of working with items that others throw away. As an artist her work is focused around the interplay between creativity and caring for the environment. Her approach to reducing, reusing, repairing, renovating, and recycling permeates Marga’s approach to her sustainable fashion house Margamod, as well as her work as a sustainable property developer on the island of Lanzarote. ‘Creativity is an inherent value of the human being, given the same object, each person sees a different solution, which gives a unique value to the work they carry out.’ In a world where people are encouraged to increase their consumption of new products, she is keen to encourage people to engage creatively with the world they inhabit. ‘The purchase has an immediate and ephemeral satisfaction, whereas the artistic intervention with the objects has a lasting satisfaction over time.’ One approach to embedding her philosophy on a larger scale is to change the face of recycling centres. Rather than being places we inhabit briefly, often as an inconvenience to be endured, they can become reception, storage, and education centres. In this way,

132  Emmanuel Manu et al. they have the potential to provide a valuable place for people to access items as well as learn how to repair or reuse them in new ways. She sees the benefits extending far beyond the items themselves, by having a positive impact on people and planet. ‘A receiving center for objects to be recycled or restored can in turn be a teaching center. Open to people of all backgrounds, they will prove particularly useful for those from disadvantaged backgrounds. In this way, both the objects and the people are transformed. People would regain value through recovering the objects and learning different trades, such as carpentry, sewing and locksmithing.’ In this way, Marga provides practical steps to involve the public in creating a circular economy and sustainable value chains. ‘A chair in the garbage, even if it only has three legs, has the value of wood whose tree was planted, grew, passed through the carpenter, was pointed, assembled and has the soul of objects that have lived a little history. That chair is a good canvas for your creativity and again increases its value, in addition to contributing to a more respectful relationship with our planet.’

These case examples illustrate how the circular economy can support the achievement of SDGs 8 Decent work and economic growth, 12 Responsible and sustainable consumption, 13 Climate action, and specifically targets 8.3, to promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalisation and growth of micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services; 12.5, to substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling, and reuse; and 13.3, to improve human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, and impact reduction.

Chapter summary The drive to promote a circular economy model in the construction industry and the built environment will continue to intensify. Sustained efforts in generating social, financial, and environmental values through the circular economy in the construction industry will largely depend on adoption of circular strategies and business models within the whole supply chain. Circular business models provide an innovative thinking platform for the construction supply chain, new entrepreneurs, and construction practitioners to think about how they can create new products, processes, and deliver new services within a circular economy. The firms that will

Circular economy  133 be successful are those that focus on solving problems and making things work by being adaptable and flexible. Supply chain organisations will also need to recognise and empower their people with skills that enable them to perform to their highest potential within a circular economy. This focus on training, talent, new skills, and general awareness of the creation of a circular economy amongst construction supply chain businesses will stimulate innovative thinking and circular solutions. This will create financial value through new business streams, whilst also creating social value through new job opportunities. Successful adoption of circular business models will require localised rather than global supply chains, with an emphasis on shorter material flow/circulation loops that provide the environmental benefit of minimising whole-life carbon, whilst reinforcing the creation of local employment and business opportunities to generate social value. Construction supply chains that position themselves as early movers by developing the necessary circular competencies, and even going a step further to establish subsidiaries driven by circular business models, will be at the forefront of disrupting the linear (take-make-dispose) model and as such be able to future-proof their businesses. The future is looking promising for financially viable, environmentally supportive, and socially equitable businesses.

References Akanbi, L.A., Oyedele A.O., Oyedele L.O., Salami, R.O. (2020) Deep learning model for demolition waste prediction in a circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 274, 1–12. Arup (2016) The circular economy in the built environment, https://www.arup.com/-/ media/arup/files/publications/c/arup_circulareconomy_builtenvironment.pdf [accessed 3 May 2021]. Auerswald, P.E. (2009) Creating social value. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 7(2), 50–55. BAM and ARUP (2017) Circular business models for the built environment, https:// www.arup.com/-/media/arup/files/publications/a/8436_business-models-low-res. pdf [accessed 3 May 2021]. CIOB (2020) Mapping tool for unused construction materials launched, Construction Manager, https://constructionmanagermagazine.com/mapping-tool-for-unusedconstruction-materials-launched/ [accessed 8 April 2021]. Ecotechceram (n.d.) Our solution: The Eco-Stock®, https://www.ecotechceram. com/en/eco-stock/ [accessed 8 April 2021]. EIT Climate-KIC (2019) The challenges and potential of circular procurements in public construction projects, https://www.climate-kic.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ Procurements-in-Public-Construction.pdf [accessed 8 April 2021]. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2015) Growth within: A circular economy for a competitive Europe, https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/ publications/EllenMacArthurFoundation_Growth-Within_July15.pdf [accessed 24 July 2021].

134  Emmanuel Manu et al. Ellen MacArthur Foundation (2017) Case studies: Selling light as a service, https:// www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/case-studies/selling-light-as-a-service [accessed 24 July 2021]. Esposito, M., Tse, T. and Soufani, K. (2018) Introducing a circular economy: New thinking with new managerial and policy implications. California Management Review, 60(3), 5–19. ING (2017) Circular construction: Most opportunities for demolishers and wholesalers, https://think.ing.com/reports/circular-construction-most-opportunities-fordemolishers-and-wholesalers/ [accessed 3 May 2021]. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D. and Hekkert, M. (2017) Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–232. Morseletto, P. (2020) Targets for a circular economy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 153, 104553. Nasir, M.H.A., Genovese, A., Acquaye, A.A., Koh, S. and Yamoah, F. (2017) Comparing linear and circular supply chains: A case study from the construction industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 183, 443–457. Potting, J., Hekkret, M., Worrell, E. and Hanemaaijer, A. (2017) Circular economy: Measuring innovation in the product chain, http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/ files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2016-circular-economy-measuring-innovation-in-product-chains-2544.pdf [accessed 3 May 2021]. Rollinson, A.N. and Oladejo, J.M. (2019) ‘Patented blunderings’, efficiency awareness, and self-sustainability claims in the pyrolysis energy from waste sector. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 233–242. Schraven, D., Bukvić, U., Di Maio, F. and Hertogh, M. (2019) Circular transition: Changes and responsibilities in the Dutch stony material supply chain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 150, 104359. Teece, D.J. (2010) Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 172–194. Tingley, D.D., Cooper, S. and Cullen, J. (2017) Understanding and overcoming the barriers to structural steel reuse, a UK perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 148, 642–652. Tukker, A. (2015) Product services for a resource-efficient and circular economy – a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 76–91. Van Caneghem, J., Van Acker, K., De Greef, J., Wauters, G. and Vandecasteele, C. (2019) Waste-to-energy is compatible and complementary with recycling in the circular economy. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 21(5), 925–939. Vilella, M. (2019) Waste-to-energy is not a sustainable business the EU says, Zerowaste Europe, https://zerowasteeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/zero_waste_europe_policy_briefing_sustainable_finance_en.pdf [accessed 3 May 2021]. Witjes, S. and Lozano, R. (2016) Towards a more circular economy: Proposing a framework linking sustainable public procurement and sustainable business models. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 112, 37–44.

8

A strategic social value framework – a consultancy perspective Kevin Osbon

This chapter presents a consultant’s perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value. Focus Consultants is the organisation, and we discuss how their commitment to a sustainable future for the built environment manifests in corporate best practice and social value through education, training, employment, and consultancy services. This is an organisation that drives good practice and social value from the top-down with support for employee-led initiatives. We share how these approaches connect within Focus Consultants’ social value framework and explore the correlation between company performance and social value activity through their Social Value Investment Hierarchy. We provide • • • •

Staff training and professional development Work experience placements Apprenticeships Workshops and seminars to community groups

• Site labour sourced locally, creating local jobs • Using and supporting local supply chains • Recruiting young people direct from local education providers retaining core skills in the local community

• Provision of professional services on community, public sector, socio-economic and people focused regeneration programmes with social value at the core • Increase resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes

• Increase information and awareness for sustainable development, business, and lifestyles • Deliver seminars to the public & third sectors on funding for arts, heritage and conservation • Reduce waste through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse

Figure 8.1 Consultant perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-10

136  Kevin Osbon practical insights and demonstrate how consultants can help achieve a range of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), primarily 4 Quality education, 8 Decent work and economic growth, 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure, and 12 Responsible consumption and production, and in brief also 7 Affordable and clean energy, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, 13 Climate action, and 17 Partnerships for the goals.

Focus Consultants Focus Consultants is a multi-disciplinary consultancy established in 1994 to provide professional services across the property development spectrum. Since the beginning, Focus Consultants have been involved with community, public sector, socio-economic, and people-focussed regeneration programmes with social value at their core (Focus Consultants, 2021a). This means that they have been in the ’front line’ as the concept of social value has evolved and crystallised into the structured measures recognised today. Any consultancy needs to move with the times and reflect the priorities of its key customers. Focus Consultants are no different. Over the last 25 years, they have grown from their roots in the East Midlands to delivering services across the UK through a network of over 50 professionals. Their approach to social value has matured in parallel, moving from early ad hoc approaches based on desirable outcomes, to a suite of planned internal programmes that are designed to meet all statutory requirements, client priorities, and framework necessities. Focus Consultants are committed to a sustainable future for the built environment. Their approach to social value stems from their commitment to corporate best practice, which is often formally recognised by accreditation to ISO 9001. This includes: • • • • • • •

Privacy Policy Data Protection Policy Equality of Opportunity Policy Health and Safety Policy Quality Assurance Policy (ISO 9001:208 Certified) Environmental Policy (ISO 14001:2015 Certified) Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking Statement.

As the concept of social value has developed and become widely accepted by clients and adopted by Focus Consultants’ public sector framework partners, for example, ESPO, Pagabo, Bloom, and the NHS Shared Business Service (Focus Consultants, 2021b), the challenge has shifted to take the spirit of these policies and develop systems that capture the resulting socially valuable activities. In short, Focus Consultants deliberately set out to

A strategic social value framework  137 formalise, measure, and record the social value the company was generating through the creation of their ‘Social Value Framework’. We share this after a brief section that explores public sector frameworks.

Public sector frameworks Focus Consultants work on a variety of public sector frameworks (or procurement frameworks or Framework Agreements as they are also commonly known). These are arrangements where a buyer selects suppliers and sets terms and prices for a period in advance (often as much as three to four years in the future), and then calls on the suppliers to deliver the specification when required. The framework gives buyers the flexibility to order services and products from public and private sector clients multiple times without going through the full tender process each time. A common model utilised by framework organisations is the 3+1, a three-year framework with the ability to extend the commission by a further year if desired. Social value has become a key issue for framework partners. It is assessed at the framework tendering stage through a ‘mixed methods’ approach (see Chapter 14), which differentiates between tenderers using a range of measurement criteria, including social value. Consequently, the social value activities a company can evidence provide competitive advantage over other tenderers in terms of winning a contract or being retained on the framework. In real terms, social value performance is currently assessed each time a framework is re-tendered, generally every three years. Focus Consultants’ experience on a range of frameworks gives them clear insight into current practice. Importantly, they report that there is currently an absence of a continuous improvement system being used by framework operators to assess the social value contribution of consultants during the operational period of the framework. As such, the current social value drivers for many consultants are commercial and marketing-led aimed at winning a place on the frameworks. In turn, framework operators tend to assess the progression of their consultant’s social value performance every 3+1 years. We see social value as a virtuous circle. We invest in socially important projects, and this leads to benefits for individuals, communities, and society as a whole as well making us more competitive in the marketplace. (Kevin Osbon, Founding Partner, Focus Consultants) The assessment of social value tends to be a mix of considering qualitative (quality) and quantitative (cost) measures, usually proportioned on a 50-50% or 60-40% quality to cost weighting ratio. In terms of qualitative scoring, social value has, in recent times, accounted for in the region of 5%–15% of the overall score. Taking 10% as a typical social value mid-point, and 55% as a typical quality mid-point, based on Focus Consultants’ experience of the sector, this would generate the following social value importance calculation (see Figure 8.2).

138  Kevin Osbon

Figure 8.2 Social value importance calculation.

This would suggest that in terms of framework tenders for consultant work, social value has an importance of 5.5% in terms of the overall competitive framework tender. As such, social value has become important enough to ensure that consultancy practices are aware of the need to demonstrate their social value credentials as they represent approximately 5.5% of the tender weighting, given the outline provided above. In turn, this raises the importance of the social value claims made at tender stage and begs the question ‘who is checking the claims being made in tenders?’. Focus Consultants have a limited number of individual contracts appointed under frameworks where they commit to provide social value outputs. Examples include providing local students with work experience, or delivering a training session, mentoring or community presentation undertaken without any fee charge. Once retained on individual initiatives by both their framework and non-framework clients, Focus Consultants will ascertain whether the same clients wish to build social value requirements into the tendering processes. In Focus Consultants’ Lead Consultant and Project Management roles, they will, where clients require, build measurable social value questions into the tender and appraisal process for retaining other consultants, such as architects and engineers, as well as for tendering and retaining the Principal Contractors. It should be noted that it is currently rare for the assessment of social value to cascade to Principal Contractors tendering for trade sub-contractors, although elements such as use of local labour or locally sourced materials may be possible where procurement rules allow. Focus Consultants believe that there is a clear correlation between social value and public and private sector clients. Their client base is currently 75% public sector and 25% private sector. They note that there is a growing requirement for consultants to demonstrate their commitment and contribution to social value objectives within the public sector, including local authorities, NHS, Blue light (emergency services), and education. However, within their private sector client, commercial considerations remain the key drivers and social value requirements do not currently appear to be core to their measurable objectives, outputs, or requirements, except in certain circumstances such as with planning conditions. For further information, see https://www.focus-consultants.com/about/ frameworks/

A strategic social value framework  139

Focus Consultants’ social value framework Focus Consultants have developed a corporate social value framework to formally plan, and then capture, activity through SMART (Smart, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Timely) objectives. This is applied to their social value activities and objectives relating to: • • • • •

Fundraising Volunteering Employment Support Knowledge Transfer and Mentoring The Environment.

Each of these objectives has specific activity areas incorporating both planned and unplanned events that are summarised in Figure 8.3. Those that are planned are part of the organisation’s strategic approach and they are carefully managed as an ongoing calendar of commitments. For example, in terms of fundraising, each year Focus Consultants select a charity that they will support, for which they arrange fundraising golf day. Volunteering-related planned activities include events and events support, work as trustees and committee members, and environmental initiatives. Employment support includes planned work placements and internships, apprenticeships, support for reintroduction to work, and further and higher education qualifications. It also extends to include formal training and development plans, and consultancy services to assist clients in procuring local labour. Their environmental targets are carefully planned, whereas knowledge transfer and mentoring include both planned and unplanned actions. The unplanned activities respond to local requests for support and specific requirements of ad hoc projects. Examples include staff-initiated fundraising to support a personally significant cause (Focus Consultants, 2021c), and proposals from partner organisations, such as local universities to deliver guest lectures and/or carry out site visits with students. In order to ensure that the support is timely and relevant, they combine planned and unplanned activities, which take the form of either financial or in-kind support, through donations of time. Professional time is the most important resource any consultancy can offer and Focus Consultants plan for and encourage members of staff to bring forward ideas for using their time to create and deliver social value. Every member of the team has issues they are passionate about, often closely connected to their personal lives, and through these Focus Consultants have contributed to a wide range of initiatives such as cancer and Alzheimer’s research, and a local ‘Stonebridge City Farm’ charity.

140  Kevin Osbon FUNDRAISING (Financial Support)

VOLUNTEERING (Physical Resource Support)

Annual Selected Charity

Planned Planned

Golf Day

Un-Planned

Request for Support / Sponsorship

Un-Planned

Staff Fundraising Initiatives

Planned

Annual Events

Planned

Other Events Support Community / Resource Support

Planned - Un-Planned

EMPLOYMENT SUPPORT (Resource and Financial)

Un-Planned

Special Projects

Planned

Trustee / Committee Member / Other

Un-Planned

Funding Expertise Use (Pro Bono)

Planned

Targeted Environmental Initiatives

Planned

Work Placements

Planned

Work Internship

Planned

Apprenticeships

Planned

Further Higher Education (Diplomas, Degrees, Masters, Doctorates)

Planned - Un-Planned

Professional Qualifications Attainment / Support Re-introduction to Work Support

Planned

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER / MENTORING

ENVIRONMENTAL

Planned

Formal Training and Development Plan

Planned

Assist Clients to Procure Local Labour Including Training / Employment Support

Planned - Un-Planned

Provide Largely Ad Hoc Seminars / Lectures

Planned - Un-Planned

Mentoring Focus Staff

Planned - Un-Planned

Mentoring Clients / Colleagues

Planned - Un-Planned

Alumni Student Mentoring

Un-Planned

General Advice / Support

Planned - Un-Planned

Guest Lecturing at Colleges / Universities / Third Age events

Un-Planned

Hosting Site Visits for Students

Planned - Un-Planned

Sponsorship of Specialist Providers / Educators / Initiatives

Planned

• • • •

Company Formal Transport Plan Encourage Home Working / Offices Downsizing Efficiency Gains Encourage Public Transport Usage Encouraged Shared Car Usage Encourage Bike Use / Walking Etc

Planned

Business Mileage Reduction Target (3% in 2019)

Planned

Ongoing Power Usage Reduction Target (2% in 2019)

Planned

Water Usage Reduction Target (1% in 2019)

Planned

Reduction in Stationary Use Target (10% in 2019)

Figure 8.3 Focus Consultants’ social value framework.

The social value impact grows naturally from Focus’ portfolio of community and social work, which have formed key elements of their consultancy portfolio since their inception. Quite apart from the humane perspective of giving back to the communities they live and work in, their social value credentials help with team building, staff, and customer loyalty programmes, in addition to generating positive publicity.

A strategic social value framework  141 In the next sections, we look, in turn, at the details of each social value objective (fundraising, volunteering, employment support, knowledge transfer and mentoring, and the environment). Fundraising Focus Consultants’ policy ensures that a percentage of their working capital is available for social value-related activity. The amount varies as it is dependent on the overall financial performance and strength of the company. In broad terms, it equates to 2% of annual working capital. This amount is then increased by both individual team and contributions, which traditionally generate 40–50 times the amount of original capital assigned. By way of an illustration, a £1,650 corporate contribution they made resulted in over £60,000 being generated towards their designated cause. Some specific activities they have supported financially include: • • •

Longhurst Housing IASRA Cultural Event (September 2014: £400) Marks and Spencer’s Charity (July 2017: £1,000) Leicestershire County Show (August 2019: £500).

In addition to their corporate investment, the Focus Consultants’ team supports charities across the UK for causes that have touched their lives, for example: • • • • • • • • • •

Contributed £100,000 for Alzheimer’s sufferers through a group trek to Machu Picchu £2,500 for breast cancer through a 26-mile walk through London £180 to the Butterfly Hospice in Boston through a charity golf day £2,500 for the Get Kids Going Charity through completing the London Marathon Raising £200 for Help for Heroes through Skydiving Over £3,000 for the NSPCC through the 3 Peak challenge in 24 hours Donating £224 for the Macmillan Nurses through a coffee and cake morning Donating £300 to the St Barnabas Hospice in Lincoln Sponsoring the Paviours ‘Minis’ Rugby Tour of Derbyshire for over 50 boys and girls Donations each Christmas to Charities in lieu of sending cards.

Volunteering As a team, and as individuals, Focus Consultants have donated time to many projects, for example: Founder Partner Kevin Osbon gave three years of free consultancy for approximately one day a week (equivalent to £80,000 of professional fees) to Fiskerton-cum-Morton sports and community facility. Kevin led the project and his portfolio

142  Kevin Osbon included initial concept, securing funds, designing, managing, costing, tendering, and eventual delivery of a new £400,000 facility. Focus Consultant Laura Summers chairs the Stonebridge City Farm in Nottingham and provides the Trust with a team of Focus Consultants’ volunteers to undertake special projects from time to time. Focus Consultants’ volunteers co-ordinated vital supplies for the Trussell Trust Food Bank in Arnold, Nottingham, which provided 1.8 million emergency handouts in 2019, over 436,000 to children. Partner Keith Butler and Senior Building Surveyor Darren Booker delivered a talk to year 8 students at Catmose College in Oakham that included a taster session on 3D design using BIM Software. Importantly, this work showcased the varied and interesting careers available in construction to young people. Employment support Focus Consultants have a strong track record of providing training and professional development to enable team members to see the company as a career rather than just a job (Focus Consultants, 2021d). They offer work experience placements, apprenticeships, and sponsored training, including an MA in Business Administration and an MSc in Construction Management. They also deliver social value throughout the supply chain, including a requirement that all contractors guarantee an agreed percentage of site labour programmes and apprenticeships for adults and young people, and use local supply chains. These provisions often result in the lowest cost package of tenders received, as well as retain significant expenditure in the local economy. Focus Consultants deliver their services in partnership with local SMEs in accordance with Public Contract Regulations, which benefit the local area, provide local jobs and training opportunities, and drive sustainable construction. Focus Consultants also concentrate on employing local people within the organisation. For over 25 years, it has been an owner-managed SME, with all equity partners living and working in the local community. Their offices generate quality jobs for people living in and around Nottingham, Leicester, and London. They recruit young people direct from local education providers, thus retaining core skills in the local community. To ensure lifelong learning, they encourage staff to undertake flexible working to support part-time qualifications and provide personalised training throughout their careers. Knowledge transfer and mentoring Focus Consultants’ Partners provide regular pro bono lectures to students on a range of topics, including regeneration, economic development, project management, and town planning. They have long-standing relationships with the

A strategic social value framework  143 Departments of Architecture and the Built Environment at Nottingham Trent University and the University of Nottingham. This complements their own professional development seminars that they develop and deliver in close partnership with architects and contractors for a range of community groups and regeneration professionals. Focus Consultants support local people and community groups by delivering workshops and seminars on subjects such as funding, research and economic development, community and stakeholder involvement, project development and management and construction. They also provide school students with work experience in technical and administrative services, support the Princes Regeneration Trust ‘BRICK’ programme, building skills and knowledge, provide ad hoc seminars to the public and third sectors on funding for arts, heritage, and conservation, and train local people to enhance their knowledge and experience to support their own in-house operations. This work helps to ensure that people have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development. The Focus Consultants team has a strong track record of giving back to communities. Founder Partner Kevin Osbon secured funding for his local Parish Council to develop a Parish Plan that, in turn, guidedthe Newark and Sherwood District Council Local Plan. Karl Marriott, the other Founding Partner, advises North East Derbyshire and Bolsover District Councils on custom and self-building throughout North Derbyshire. Both Kevin and Karl are registered with Nottingham Trent University as Alumni Student Members to provide guidance to students. Senior Consultant Lucy Pike supported a local school to secure £7,500 to create an allotment-style school garden and Partner Heather Frecklington helped her local Karate Club gain funding. The environment Focus Consultants are recognised market leaders in the delivery of best practice environmental services. By practising what they preach, they make sure to minimise the effect of their operations on the environment, treating the natural world with consideration and respect. Focus Consultants believe that raising awareness and working ensuring responsible use of finite natural resources make sound commercial sense and are incorporated in their environmental policy: • • • • •

Ensure compliance with legislation and codes of practice Reduce waste to a minimum, and recycle consumable materials Use working practices which do not adversely affect the environment Maintain vehicles to ensure minimum harmful emissions Promote energy efficiency and energy saving in offices.

144  Kevin Osbon These commitments are included in their adoption of quality standard ISO 14001. Through this well-recognised accredited environmental management system, Focus Consultants incorporate continual improvement and they are motivated to ensure that their ongoing assessment minimises environmental impacts. Key aspects include energy, transport, and general office management internally within the company, and by delivering BREEAM methodologies to clients as detailed further below. Energy Focus Consultants target year-on-year reductions in utility use by having a policy of switching off all equipment when not in use. They use low energy lighting, high efficiency gas boilers, and improved insulation. Their energy provider has invested in renewable technologies, and all company IT hardware and photocopiers have integrated energy-efficient settings. Transport Focus Consultants continually reduce their business mileage. They also reduce stationery delivery traffic by consolidating orders, and for some time now have encouraged home working, conference calls, and video conferencing to reduce staff travel mileage. The Covid-19 pandemic is expected to have a huge impact in respect of reducing travel mileage. As with so many other organisations, Focus Consultants have embedded new working practices during the pandemic and have found that their clients are engaging and embracing the use of technology for meetings and engagement, thereby lessening the need to travel. They expect this mode of operation and working to remain. General office and consumables Focus Consultants are committed to reducing paper use by retaining electronic instead of hard copy files where possible, including replacing hard copy archives with electronic data. They actively promote electronic tendering and seek to annually reduce the amount of general waste in landfill through recycling wastepaper, cardboard, cartridges, toners, and IT equipment. Their policies have evolved over time. For example, they previously sent Christmas cards to clients as part of their policy for nurturing longterm relationships but discontinued this in favour of electronic cards some years ago. The resulting saving was then donated to a charitable cause chosen by the staff. Focus Consultants have kept this principle in place since 2007 at which time they were able to donate £300 to the Air Ambulance Charity.

A strategic social value framework  145 BREEAM Focus Consultants also deliver environmental projects for their clients, leading professional project teams in sustainability reviews to consider measures to reduce energy consumption in the construction and operation of buildings. They deliver BREEAM methodologies, which is a sustainability assessment method for masterplanning projects, infrastructure, and buildings (BRE, 2021), to: • • • • • • • • • •

Encourage client awareness of environmental and sustainable issues Promote locally sourced materials from renewable sources Encourage material selection that includes sustainability criteria – renewability, embodied energy, recyclability, true cost, resource scarcity, and toxicity Use sustainable construction processes to minimise the impact of construction on the environment Improve sustainability in building operation – reduce energy demand, consumption, and maximise recycling Develop an environmental action policy and annual action plan Measure reductions in energy use and carbon footprint Explore opportunities for passing on to not-for-profit organisations redundant FFE Use electronic certification and online portals for information sharing Recycle construction materials.

Integrating these, and new evolving requirements, will make a real difference in achieving carbon reductions, and the Focus Consultants team are leading the way.

Measuring social value Focus Consultants monitor and measure social value interventions annually, in terms of direct finance and the provision of time. They show a direct correlation between company performance and social value activity, as demonstrated in their ‘Social Value Investment Hierarchy’ in Figure 8.4. As stated, the Social Value Investment Hierarchy illustrates the link between profit and giving. In the years Focus Consultants make higher profits, they give more. It also highlights the value of their donations of time for volunteering and mentoring. Overall, the Social Value Investment Hierarchy presents the corporate approach to social value as resembling an onion with many layers. Working from the centre out, when profits are good, more layers of the onion

146  Kevin Osbon ACTIVITY Sponsorship (High) Specialist Projects Environmental Initiatives Golf Day

FUNDING (HIGH) TIME (HIGH)

High Plus Profits High Profits

Medium Plus Profits

Sponsorship (Medium)

FUNDING (MEDIUM)

Employment Support / Mentoring

TIME (MEDIUM)

Medium Profits

Sponsorship (Low) Annual Charity

FUNDING (LOW)

Low and Profits

Mentoring Advice

Low Profits

TIME (LOW) Volunteering

Nil or Negative Profits

LOW ACTIVITY

Figure 8.4 Focus Consultants’ Social Value Investment Hierarchy.

can be applied. During less profitable years, perhaps only two or three onion layers are applied, whereas all six layers in years can be deployed when the company is making healthy profits. At core, Focus Consultants are a commercial business, with the key objective to make profit to reward their shareholders. Hopefully, this chapter has shown that this need not preclude the delivery of social value to complement commercial objectives. Whilst there is always room for improvement, Focus Consultants’ track record of taking social value very seriously over the last 25 years has shown that the two perspectives can happily co-exist. As social value is integral to the way in which Focus Consultants work, we have shown that their approach also helps to achieve many SDGs, including 4 Quality education, 7 Affordable and clean energy, 8 Decent work and economic growth, 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, 12 Responsible consumption and production, 13 Climate action, and 17 Partnerships for the goals. Work towards these goals is embedded in the company value system and business model. Specifically, in terms of SDG 4, ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all, Focus Consultants demonstrate commitment to sustainability and social value by supporting

A strategic social value framework  147 and sponsoring staff training and development, providing a wider range of work placement opportunities, engaging with apprenticeship training, and delivering workshops and seminars to community groups. These activities contribute towards targets 4.3: ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational, and tertiary education, including university; and 4.4: to substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs, and entrepreneurship. In terms of SDG 7 Affordable and clean energy, Focus Consultants use an energy provider who has invested in renewable technologies. This helps to increase the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix (target 7.2). With regard to the SDG 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, targets 9.1: to develop quality, reliable, sustainable, and resilient infrastructure and to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all, 9.2: to promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation, and 9.4: to upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, are relevant to how Focus Consultants operate as they deliver environmental projects for their clients, leading professional project teams in sustainability reviews through BREEAM methodologies. SDG 12 Responsible consumption and production support is one of the centre pillars in Focus Consultants’ approach to social value, in that their work contributes towards several targets: 12.2: to achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources; 12.5: to substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling, and reuse – Focus Consultants reduce paper use, retain electronic files, actively promote electronic tendering, reduce the amount of general waste, and recycle where possible; 12.6: to encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle – Focus Consultants deliver BREEAM methodologies; and finally, target 12.8: to ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature – Focus Consultants deliver workshops and seminars to local people, community groups, the public, and third sectors to increase knowledge and experience. This links in with SDG 13 Climate action and target 13.3: to improve education, awareness-raising,

148  Kevin Osbon and human and institutional capacities on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction, and early warning. For further information, see https://www.focus-consultants.com/

Chapter summary This chapter has given a brief insight into how a real-world SME operating in the consultancy environment has developed and delivered social value policy and practice over 25 years. Their approach has developed from informal and ad hoc initiatives in the early days, to the creation of a sophisticated Social Investment Hierarchy Mode. Focus Consultants have found that social value initiatives are good for the company in general, as well as for their staff and team building. These practices engender a feel-good factor in the business and loyalty from invested individuals. Social value can take many forms. Focus Consultants emphasise fundraising, volunteering, employment support, knowledge transfer and mentoring, and the environment. The company commits both direct financial support and the donation of expert time, and their social value achievements and outputs need to be SMART and measurable. Others aspiring to consider, create, and deliver social value will need to develop their own journey in order to meet client and framework requirements. Focus Consultants advocate a planned approach, which balances commercial and social value aspects. Whilst social value attracts positive public relations and offers an opportunity to maximise social media impact, it also helps to create a culture of harnessing the knowledge of experienced professionals beyond work-related tasks. At Focus Consultants, greater profits generate greater social value, which the company views as an important win for the company, their employees, clients, and the wider community. Overall, Focus Consultants are keen to draw attention to their approach to environmental education. They view educating all participants in development of the built environment as imperative. The sector has to adapt to meet the wider needs of our planet and this needs to move beyond soundbites to real actions on the ground.

References BRE (2021) BREEAM, Garston: Building Research Establishment, https://www. breeam.com/ [accessed 19 April 2021]. Focus Consultants (2021a) About, Nottingham: Focus Consultants, https://www. focus-consultants.com/about/ [accessed 19 April 2021]. Focus Consultants (2021b) Frameworks, Nottingham: Focus Consultants, https:// www.focus-consultants.com/about/frameworks/ [accessed 19 April 2021].

A strategic social value framework  149 Focus Consultants (2021c) Responsible business, Nottingham: Focus Consultants, https://www.focus-consultants.com/about/responsible-business/ [accessed 19 April 2021]. Focus Consultants (2021d) Working at Focus, Nottingham: Focus Consultants, https://www.focus-consultants.com/careers/working-at-focus/ [accessed 19 April 2021].

9

A client perspective on creating and delivering social value Miranda Plowden, Ani Raiden, and Andrew King

This chapter presents a client perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value in the commissioning of capital projects. We set out two example projects to showcase South Yorkshire Housing Association’s approach to social value: a workspace and a new housing development. We also offer two neighbourhood development projects, one from the UK: a Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration in Sheffield and an exemplary international illustration of how a client can drive social value: Alt-Erlaa housing estate in Vienna, Austria. These cases provide practical insights and demonstrate how clients can

• • • •

Well-being is core to the business purpose, mission & vision Well-being is central to design Being a ‘good employer’ & staff well-being part of the strategic plan Customer well-being: calm, relaxedcommunal eating & meeting places, homes &neighbourhoods to live well in

•

Co-governed, co-designed, co-commissioned, co-delivered & coevaluated programme Working directly with local people Local residents leading the partnership & design Welcoming office space for staff, customers & visitors

• • •

• • • •

Promoting public procurement practices that are sustainable City Centre location, offices close to public transport & where they can support local businesses Retrofitting an existing building Electric vehicle charging points & photovoltaics

• • • • •

High quality relationships between employees and customers Open plan offices encourage & facilitate collaborations Aim to engage with wider community & foster new partnerships Inclusive multi-party teamwork Community-led partnership

Figure 9.1 A client perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-11

A client perspective  151 help achieve selected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); specifically, SDGs 3 Good health and well-being, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, 12 Responsible consumption and production, and 17 Partnership for the goals, and also 8 Decent work and economic growth, 10 Reduced inequalities, 13 Climate action, 15 Life on land, and 16 Peace justice and strong institutions.

South Yorkshire Housing Association South Yorkshire Housing Association is a large social landlord located in the Sheffield City Region, North of England in the UK. With more than 6,000 homes, including an extensive supported housing portfolio and a wide range of health, care, and employment services delivered to customers who don’t live in their homes, well-being is core to their purpose (South Yorkshire Housing Association, 2020). As one of the employees puts it: We are a wellbeing business, we just happen to build and rent homes. Much of the business is founded on the quality of the relationships between their employees and customers. In commissioning building works and design, it is therefore critical that all projects deliver on social impact. As a client, it is imperative that South Yorkshire Housing Association “squeezes every ounce of value” out of their capital projects, because they consume a mass of resources and will be in use for the next 50–100 years, or indeed longer. South Yorkshire Housing Association therefore believes that they have a responsibility to make every project the best it can be, and to deliver on a range of outcomes. You only get one shot: once they are built, there’s not much you can do to change them. (Director, South Yorkshire Housing Association) The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE, 2002) guide on commissioning excellent capital projects for public bodies and community organisations stresses that “clients should spend enough time at the right time in a project” and this guiding principle has had a strong influence on how South Yorkshire Housing Association develops their projects. The team have learned that to achieve a successful project, they must: • •

Take time on the brief Take time to select the right design team

152  Miranda Plowden et al. • • • •

Take time to develop the brief with that team Take time to consider and co-design with the end user Take time to review and critique proposals at every stage Take time to enshrine the design thinking in the ongoing management and maintenance of the project.

The brief has to be generous in scope to allow their investment to optimise social, environmental, and economic impacts at every size and scale of project. By way of illustration, we present two case studies based in Sheffield: 1 2

A single building – South Yorkshire Housing Association’s workspace at Rockingham Street in the city centre A group of buildings – a new housing development at Slingsby Place.

For further information, see https://www.syha.co.uk

Rockingham Street – a workspace for a social housing business This single building development project was focused on the transformation of the South Yorkshire Housing Association office space on Rockingham Street. The old offices included a mix of open plan work areas and offices with limited meeting spaces, and little opportunity to invite their customers into the space. It was effectively a rabbit warren of magnolia-painted corridors carpeted in their existing corporate colours of purple with grey. In feel, it was dark, poky, and uninspiring. In contrast, the new building, which is spread over five floors, is light, airy, and a much more inspiring place to be. The ground floor acts as a reception and multi-functional space, which is supported by a suite of meeting rooms. The top floor has a flexible activity space supported by quiet break-out spaces, including The View which looks out onto the roof garden. The three floors in between combine open plan desking with a wide range of break-out, meeting, and collaboration spaces. There are no individual offices. The whole building reflects the colours of their new brand which is rooted in the landscape of South Yorkshire: terracotta and earth colours on the ground floor, greens in the middle floors, and sky blues on the top floor. The building provides the base for some 400 employees, with a further 200 people using it for meetings and events. The ground floor was a key area for consideration, and its conception took months of deliberation. It is designed around a lounge and kitchen, where everyone is welcome. Whoever you are, you can make yourself a brew, eat lunch, talk, meet, and work alone or in groups. From the moment South Yorkshire Housing Association moved into the new office building, customers have commented that they felt at home in these spaces. Visitors coming

A client perspective  153 into the building cannot tell who a customer is and who is an employee, which is very different from most workspaces, where customers are penned in a separate reception area. There is direct evidence of the impact on customer well-being. As an example, one key worker session, which consisted of a supportive conversation between a customer and one of the South Yorkshire Housing Association’s LiveWell team members, lasted an hour and a half (instead of snatching few minutes) because the space was calm, relaxed, and conducive to conversation. On another occasion, the facility offered a rare opportunity for a homeless customer to spend time with his estranged mother, a place to pull up chairs around a kitchen table and eat together. Employee well-being also lies at the heart of the building’s design. There are a wide variety of spaces to work in, natural daylight, windows that open, planting, quiet rooms, places to eat away from the desk, “The View”, the roof garden, a meditation, and prayer room looking onto a planted balcony on the floor below, showers to encourage people to run and cycle to work, yoga sessions, a spiral staircase to tempt people away from the lift, and an overall calm décor. The aim of the design was to improve staff well-being so that they can do their best work. This approach has made a positive contribution to business effectiveness as the building helps engage employees as it reflects

Figure 9.2 South Yorkshire Housing Association’s brand purpose, social kitchen/ dining area on the ground floor, and flexible and collaborative workspaces.

154  Miranda Plowden et al. the interactions they need on any given day to enable them to work productively. The design has stimulated matrix working and cross-directorate collaboration. Although nobody anticipated a global pandemic when developing the design, the building’s adaptable features have made it feasible to create a Covid-secure working environment. It has been easy to manage the flow through the building, using the staircase near the front door to move up the building and the one at the rear of the building to move down. South Yorkshire Housing Association has also been able to spread people out by moving furniture and reconfiguring spaces effortlessly owing to the simple layouts. Covid-19 limited the use of the building during 2020 and it is anticipated that working from home will become a regular feature of the working week in the long-term (see Chapter 4 for further discussion on flexible working). South Yorkshire Housing Association expects to further reduce the number of desks in the building and expand the meeting and collaboration spaces because organisational culture and sense of belonging are central to their work. Having a space where people can come together, collaborate, and celebrate will be a permanent feature of the business. An important consideration will also be to think about how South Yorkshire Housing Association can bring in other organisations and activities to make the space more vibrant, and inclusive of BAME and arts organisations in particular. This was another part of the thinking behind the design of the workspace: to provide an opportunity to open up the organisational space to the city and its residents generally, to be generous with the new facilities on the ground and top floors, to host events, to facilitate networks, to inspire new conversations and new ideas, and to foster new partnerships. Whilst this has been temporarily halted, as restrictions ease, the building will provide facilities for recovering, restoring, rebuilding, and renewing, as well as developing social connections. In addition to the social impact and business effectiveness, the building also delivers on environmental sustainability. Relocating to and retrofitting an existing building in the city centre, close to public transport and where South Yorkshire Housing Association can support local businesses, was important for both sustainability and business effectiveness. Key stakeholders, such as the organisation’s Sustainability Manager, have been involved throughout the development of the design and have influenced its every aspect, from the electric vehicle charging points in the basement to the photovoltaics on the roof. The following features emerged as central for considering, creating, and delivering social value in commissioning a building design project: A clear brief which combined multiple stakeholders’ input: a top-down view from the Board in the form of a strong business case for investing in

A client perspective  155 a new workspace, together with a bottom-up perspective from employees, generated in part through a live project with students from the University of Sheffield’s School of Architecture. South Yorkshire Housing Association knew what they wanted to achieve for their customers, business partners, the business, and employees (see also a discussion about stakeholder analysis in Chapter 3). Compact client team – having agreed the brief and the budget, the Board and Directors’ Team empowered the Business Development Director to deliver the project vision. With this freedom came a weighty sense of responsibility: a need to deliver a building that everyone would value (yet acknowledging that you can never please all of the people all of the time). One way to share the responsibility was to engage a small group of managers to work in a client team. The key people involved included the Sustainability Manager, Workspace Manager, Organisational Development lead, and the Head of People Team. They also reached out to others in the business to drill into the details of the brief to establish, for example, the range of project spaces that were needed, specific design requirements for the prayer room, and how best to ensure that the building could deliver on equality, diversity, and inclusion. Importantly, the core client team was kept small, not least because when the professional construction team is added to the project, it can very quickly make the design and project management processes unwieldy (see also managing relationships with stakeholders in Chapter 3). Creative vision – before starting on this project, South Yorkshire Housing Association had already commissioned a piece of work from the brand consultants, IF Collective, to develop thinking around the workspace. South Yorkshire Housing Association knew that they needed to update all of the office spaces and they wanted to ensure that this wasn’t just a cosmetic makeover: South Yorkshire Housing Association wanted the future workspace to drive productivity and better outcomes for both customers and employees. IF Collective worked effectively with customers and employees to set out the key principles and ideas that would inform the design of the new spaces (see also a discussion about participative/collaborative design in Chapter 11). An inspirational design team – BDP Sheffield were appointed as the project architects following a competitive interview process which tested their response to the brief. BDP translated the brief into a short document that showed they understood exactly what South Yorkshire Housing Association wanted, in particular their commitment to equality and diversity, and sustainability. The team held to these goals throughout the project. IF Collective provided a creative oversight, to ensure that the project delivered on the South Yorkshire Housing Association’s vision. IF Collective brought in another partner, 93ft, a local Sheffield practice, as interior designers. BWA were appointed as cost consultants from the existing South Yorkshire Housing Association panel who, in turn, recommended Barber Preston as the mechanical and electrical engineers. Although none of these teams had worked

156  Miranda Plowden et al. together before, everyone clearly understood what South Yorkshire Housing Association was trying to achieve with the project. 93ft didn’t know South Yorkshire Housing Association before this commission; they brought in a fresh set of ideas in response to the structure of the building, the Sheffield location, and South Yorkshire brand. IF Collective provided guidance on avoiding anything that could be seen as extravagant or unnecessary. The project was about social value at its heart: customer and business impact. Formal and informal conversations – Adam Park, the project architect from BDP Sheffield, provided brilliant leadership in the regular design team meetings, which involved the full professional team and the client team, steering everyone through to affordable and practical design solutions. In particular, he frequently pushed for key decisions to be made early, with the argument that if there would be nothing new to inform the decision, there was no reason to delay. This really kept the process moving. The formal meetings were supplemented with several rounds of informal conversations and email exchanges about ideas and thoughts, discussing options, and exploring alternatives. Together, the formal and informal strands and style of dialogue led the team to the final design. Persistence – in many ways, the building “designed itself”. The decision to strip out all existing partitions and expose the concrete waffle ceiling slab led to a simple floorplan informed by the waffle grid; the staircases at either end of the building formed the main circulation, with the functional parts of each floor (toilets, cloakroom, storage, kitchens) separated from the workspace by a plywood spine wall. There were areas that were really challenging to get right; in particular, the ground floor which combined reception, kitchen, and meeting spaces. Several weeks were spent tussling with this area, trying to reconcile the vision with the constraints of the existing entrance design, which was redesigned multiple times. In the end, the commitment in time and effort paid off: arguably, it is the most successful part of the building. Stamina – as with all big projects, it was a marathon with a relentless stream of decisions to be made over a two-year period, from the basic layout of the building to the detail in the design of the mugs. These decisions were made in stages: fabric, finishes, furniture, finishing touches, which helped keep focus and manage energy levels. Creative tension – new relationships and designers with different perspectives kept the thinking fresh and delivered a great result. Notably, however, the creative differences and a relatively complicated team composition (an architect, engineer, brand consultant, and interior designer all from separate practices) took some managing. It was important to include time for the team to meet together, as well as individually in client-architect, and client-interior designer meetings, to explore different perspectives and to help make decisions about what would best meet the brief. Sometimes, this meant going against the advice of one or the other. It was probably both a help and a hindrance that the client representative (the Business

A client perspective  157 Development Director) had a design background and was therefore happy to weigh up options and take decisions. For further information, see https://www.mirandaplowden.com/projects/south-yorkshire-housingassociations-workspace-2017-19-how-to-communicate-your-businesspurpose-through-design https://www.mirandaplowden.com/projects/rockingham-streetis-the-officenow-dead-5-reasons-why-well-designed-offices-matter-more-than-ever

Slingsby Place – a new social housing scheme South Yorkshire Housing Association’s homes are spread in small clusters across a relatively wide geographical area. In places where they only build a few homes, the social impact on any given neighbourhood is optimised through briefing and design (much as shown in the single building case above: Rockingham Street). Slingsby Place, a new housing development of 28 homes, illustrates how they commission and work with architects to achieve social, environmental, and economic values in new housing schemes. The houses themselves are designed to fulfil their organisational purpose: to allow people to settle, live well, and realise their potential. This means enough space to interact with, and get away from, family; private garden space; big windows with lots of daylight; good insulation that makes homes warm and cheap to heat; plenty of storage; space to do homework and/or work from home; easy access to public transport and local jobs. Covid-19 has served to highlight the importance of these features for everyday quality of life. The layout of the site fosters neighbourhood connections: a shared open space overlooked by the homes creates a safe place for children to meet and play. This space was used to host artist workshops and welcome events when the customers first moved in, which allowed people to meet each other and contribute to an artwork based on the theme “what it means to be a neighbour”. The green space around the site plays an important role: on this hilly location, the steep slopes have been used to create banks of “wildflowers” on either side of the homes, pictorial meadows created by Green Estate, which is a social enterprise that runs an urban farm across the road. The meadows are a sustainable form of landscaping, and they are also beautiful and help to create a connection between the customers and the natural environment on their doorstep. The development looks beyond its boundaries: the design and positioning of the houses make the most of the views over the city and help link people to a wider economy around them. Even the name ties people to the city: Dorothy Slingsby was one of Sheffield’s famous women of steel, now celebrated in a statue in the heart of the city centre. This is a detail that illustrates how they try and think broadly in considering, creating, and delivering social impact for their customers.

158  Miranda Plowden et al. The following features emerged as central to realising the social value aims for the project: A co-designed vision – South Yorkshire Housing Association developed a set of documents that illustrate to their design teams what they want to achieve in their new housing schemes. A design checklist and a Landscape Design Code, co-designed through conversations and workshops with their customers and maintenance teams, facilitated by an artist and designers, set out how they want their homes and estates to deliver on our purpose. On most sites, they don’t know who will be living in the homes until six weeks before practical completion and so it’s important that the customer voice comes through in these documents. (See Chapter 11: participative/collaborative design.) A cross-departmental client team – a Project Coordinator in the Development & Asset Management team leads an internal team within South Yorkshire Housing Association that includes the housing department, the people responsible for maintaining the houses and the open spaces, and the customer engagement and marketing teams. The team meets regularly to review the design proposals with frequent dialogue outside the meetings to test out ideas (see Chapter 3: stakeholder analysis and managing stakeholders). A clear and consistent project lead – the Project Coordinator leads the scheme from start to finish, manages all the internal and external relationships and communications, and troubleshoots to keep the scheme to programme and budget. They are the day-to-day lead and are immersed in detail. This helps keep an eye on the big picture, check that the scheme is delivering to the brief and ensures that difficult decisions are “owned” by the business. The role is critical in maintaining focus whilst canvassing all the different views needed for a successful outcome at key stages of the project, including, for example, feasibility studies, community consultation, budget decisions, and planning how senior decision-makers with specific responsibilities (for example, strategic direction or budgets) are involved. Most housing development projects take months and years to deliver and sometimes the lead changes part way through. Although well-documented processes and a standard file structure allow for handover, experience has shown that it is much better to keep the same lead throughout where possible (see Chapter 3: stakeholder analysis and managing stakeholders). A brief that asks questions – there are specific requirements for housing developments, such as the number, type, and tenure of houses. Whilst South Yorkshire Housing Association often has thoughts and ideas about a site and what they would like to see, they are aware that these may not recognise the full potential. Given that they are not designers, they want to get the best out of their architects. As such, their briefing documents include questions that they would like the design team to explore, for example, how the new development can reflect and link to the local social, environmental, and cultural contexts. The first task in their projects is for the design team to walk the site with them and use this as the starting point to develop the brief.

A client perspective  159 An excellent architect – the appointment of the architect as the lead designer is key. South Yorkshire Housing Association currently uses the Bloom procurement framework (Bloom, 2020) (see Chapter 8: strategic partnerships and frameworks) as it has an excellent range of practices, which they supplement with a mini-tender process. This approach helps them select against the brief, specifically including social value requirements. They look for an architectural practice with a diverse staff team that understands what they are trying to achieve, both on the site and as a social housing landlord and can demonstrate this through relevant past projects. They often take the architect’s advice on the selection of rest of the design team; established working relationships can prove beneficial. A robust cost consultant – South Yorkshire Housing Association’s Project Coordinators rely heavily on cost consultants, selected from their panel, to steer them through the project from inception to practical completion. The cost consultant is their lodestar, especially as they use a design and build contract and novate the design team to the contractor, which helps manage risk. Managing the relationship with the building contractor is especially critical to delivering on their vision for the site, so that the quality of design and the vision are translated effectively into construction and building works. To help navigate the difficult balancing act between cost, quality, and control, South Yorkshire Housing Association projects three key features early in the process that are firm and essential aspects of the development. In Slingsby Place, these were (i) creating the central homezone around which the houses were organised, (ii) making the most of the long views out of the site, and (iii) creating a distinctive edge of dry-stone walls and wildflowers. An inclusive process – the process of developing and iterating the design is critical. Usually led by the project architect, they favour a “twin experts” approach, whereby the professional team and the client (in this case also representing the future residents) are mutually respected and value each other’s opinion. This is achieved through formal meetings supplemented with less formal interactions throughout the life of the project – sharing of images and ideas in conversations and emails (see Chapter 3: stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders). For further information, see https://www.mirandaplowden.com/projects/ slingsbyplace

Southey Owlerton Neighbourhood Strategies – community-led regeneration plans Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration is a community-led partnership that was awarded £25m of British government and European funding in 1999 for a seven-year programme. Comprising 50,000 households, and a tenth of the Sheffield city population, it was one of the most deprived parts of the UK and Europe’s largest council estate at the time. We showcase the neighbourhood development scheme, the masterplan, and demonstration

160  Miranda Plowden et al. projects that were commissioned by Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration partnership. Phase one in the programme was to commission a masterplan. After the first, consultant-lediteration was rejected, a new process led by a group of local people at a neighbourhood level was commissioned. It embraced visual communication of ideas and invited professionals with specific expertise to join a team of residents and council employees. This approach became known as the Neighbourhood Strategies and took local people’s stories and ideas as its starting point. These emerged through conversations facilitated by artists and designers, and a walk and talk in which residents introduced the professional team to their neighbourhood. The community-based leaders tended to be people who were active in their Tenants and Residents Associations, or in grass roots community work in their neighbourhood. Through a series of large public events, ideas for change were tested with a wider audience in the neighbourhood. The feedback was discussed and refined in a series of meetings before the plan was jointly signed off (see Figure 9.3). The Council was nervous. They wanted a strategic plan for the area and were worried that the people who lived there would come up with a set of grass roots proposals that worked for them but lacked impact at a city scale. The process was piloted over six months in one neighbourhood and then rolled out to the other five neighbourhoods in sequence over the following 18 months. Small grants kickstarted the process: each neighbourhood group was awarded £10k of funding to develop its plan, including micro grants to support grass roots projects. After two years of working in this way, six neighbourhood plans and an overarching regeneration framework that knitted the six plans together into a vision for the area were collectively produced. The Council and the local strategic partnership endorsed the plans

Figure 9.3 The Southey Owlerton Neighbourhood Strategies process (Sheffield City Council, 2002).

A client perspective  161 and adopted them as the strategy for the area, commenting that it was extraordinary that the plans were both strategic and rooted in local people’s ideas. Twenty years later, they are still in force. Once the plans were agreed, phase two of the programme was to commission and attract excellent designers for the demonstration projects in the six neighbourhoods, each typically including a park, a neighbourhood centre, a community building, and new housing. The same residents, community development workers, and council officers who had developed the regeneration plans were able to bring their vision and ideas to the commissioning of individual project. This approach allowed the full breadth of outcomes to be achieved at this scale to meet local people’s ambition for their families and neighbours: community-owned assets, designed for environmental sustainability and well-being, with opportunities for learning and work. The programme achieved plans that are connected across different spatial scales: grass roots, neighbourhood, and city. The six neighbourhood plans were supplemented with a regeneration framework for the area as a whole. Moving between the individual, neighbourhood, and city scale generated a

Figure 9.4 Southey & Owlerton area regeneration community-led partnership.

162  Miranda Plowden et al.

Figure 9.5 Moving between the individual, neighbourhood, and city scale generated a dynamic “top-down, bottom-up” narrative that keyed the area into a wider narrative for the city (Plowden, 2021).

dynamic “top-down, bottom-up” narrative (see Figure 9.5) that keyed the area into a wider narrative for the city. This was helpful in connecting an isolated part of the city to the whole, changing local residents’ perceptions of where they lived, and also changing how other people view the area. In particular, it helped validate the new masterplan, renamed the Southey Owlerton Neighbourhood Strategies. The following features emerged as central for considering, creating, and delivering social value in commissioning the Neighbourhood Strategies: Local people supported to be strong clients – the team of “local experts” consisted of people who were knowledgeable and passionate about the places relevant to the programme. The Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration team’s community development workers facilitated residents and representatives of grass roots organisations to come together in neighbourhood groups through walks, workshops, events, and meetings to develop the plan for their neighbourhood. Each neighbourhood was represented on the Community-led Partnership Board so that the plans could be coordinated across the wider area. The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, who at the time were the government’s advisor on architecture, urban design and public space in England, provided support through a panel of enablers to develop local people to become excellent clients. “Twin experts” approach to commissioning – a team of professional experts who were interested in social, environmental, and economic outcomes, and who would support and complement the local experts (rather than try to lead or dominate the agenda), was then recruited. The team comprised a visionary landscape architect, members of the University of Sheffield’s School

A client perspective  163 of Architecture (staff and students), artists, and a community facilitator. In addition, a team of council staff from every directorate was brought together and met weekly to review progress and share reflections. These teams worked with the local experts as equals, facilitated by Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration community development workers, and participated jointly in all the events and activities, learning from each other and developing the ideas and thinking together. Visual and creative tools – artists and designers developed new tools, both to source ideas and to communicate them. These included creating postcards with ideas for improving places and arts activities to show movement patterns; 3-D models of each neighbourhood built up from contour plans on which people could mark their homes and make suggestions; and “trigger” boards which showed ideas, rather than proposals, to stimulate debate. Through a series of events, workshops, and many meetings, the plans were finetuned: one for each neighbourhood and a regeneration framework for the area as a whole. The plans embraced social, environmental, and economic sustainability and were extensively illustrated with maps, diagrams, and precedent images. Strong but facilitative leadership and programme management – it was a necessarily complex process involving many stakeholders, relationships, ideas, and projects. The Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration team led and oversaw the process, facilitating the engagement of the participants through ongoing and extensive communications, meetings, and a diverse range of events. Excellent designers – because of the challenges with the original, consultant-led masterplan, a rule was introduced to ensure that local people would always score tender submissions and be part of the interview panel for all design teams, working as equal players alongside the Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration team and council officers. With the support of the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, and by aggregating small projects into bigger programmes, they were able to attract excellent designers, who understand and consider social value, to work on the programme for what were sometimes very modest commissions. All the projects were designed to build a distinctive character for the area that celebrated its potential to support well-being, environmental sustainability, community networks, and opportunities for learning and work. Enough time at the right time – because of the importance of the local people’s role and the complexity of the programme, it was essential to adopt an iterative process to allow plenty of time for reflection and debate. Such an approach also allowed time to develop relationships, ideas, robust plans, and beautiful projects. “Grit” – overturning the previous masterplan and embarking on a new community-led process took courage. When the plans emerged as ambitious and aspirational, it was important for all the participants to hold their nerve and trust in the vision and the process. Also, because of the complex processes, it took enormous energy for all participants to sustain the

164  Miranda Plowden et al. engagement of multiple stakeholders and projects and to keep delivering against the vision. The plans took two years to develop, the first round of projects took a further five years to complete, and the work is still ongoing. The stamina and continuity of key players have been important elements of success. For example, the Chair of the Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration Board at the time of the neighbourhood planning process now works as the head of the community-led partnership team over 20 years later. Continuity and resilience – as members of the team inevitably change roles over time, or some people drop out, those leading the partnership, and the project managers, have to effectively introduce new players to the process and reiterate the vision and ethos of the project. New members can bring fresh energy into a team that may be stagnating or losing energy, but it is important to ensure that the programme maintains focus and momentum. We didn’t talk about co-production back then, but that is how the partnership worked: the programme was co-governed, co-designed, co-commissioned, co-delivered and co-evaluated. (Miranda Plowden, Regeneration Team Leader in 2000, Business Development Director at South Yorkshire Housing Association at the time of publication, 2021) For further information, see https://www.mirandaplowden.com/projects/asset-based-communitydevelopment-whats-changed-in-20-years Through the three case examples in Sheffield, we demonstrate how a client can drive the achievement of various SDGs. Those central to the work of South Yorkshire Housing Association and Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration partnership that we present are 3: Good health and well-being, 11: Sustainable cities and communities, 12: Responsible consumption and production, and 17: Partnership for the goals. Additionally, their social value efforts contribute to the achievement of SDGs 10: Reduced inequalities, and 16: Peace, justice and strong institutions. The general aim of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all, at all ages (SDG 3), is central to the business purpose of the client, and the design of the office building, the housing scheme, and the Neighbourhood Strategies. More specifically, strengthening the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol by way of sustainable design and social infrastructure (target 3.5), helps meet the wider social impact outcomes South Yorkshire Housing Association as the client seeks to achieve. The focus on well-being helps to reduce inequalities (SDG 10). Specifically, South Yorkshire Housing Association is focused on progressively supporting sustained growth and

A client perspective  165 financial well-being through health, care, and employment services and housing (target 10.1); empowering and promoting the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status (target 10.2); and ensuring equal opportunity and reduced inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies, and action in this regard (target 10.3). The co-governed, co-designed, co-commissioned, co- delivered, and co-evaluated programme, working directly with local residents who led the Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration partnership and design, are exemplars of good practice that help make cities and communities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable (SDG 11). They do this by enhancing inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries (target 11.3). The city centre location and offices close to public transport, supporting local businesses (where possible), retrofitting an existing building with electric vehicle charging points and photovoltaics are all well aligned with promoting sustainable public procurement practices (SDG 12, target 12.7). The Southey Owlerton Neighbourhood Strategies communityled partnership promotes peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, providing access to justice for all and helping build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels (SDG 16). More specifically, this ensures responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels (target 16.7). In terms of partnerships for the goals (SDG 17), encouraging and promoting effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, and building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships (target 17.17) are evidenced in numerous ways. Examples include the high-quality relationships between employees and customers at South Yorkshire Housing Association, their open plan offices that were commissioned to encourage and facilitate collaboration, and aim to engage with wider community and foster new partnerships, together with inclusive multi-party teamwork, and community-led partnership processes.

Alt-Erlaa housing estate in Vienna, Austria Vienna in Austria is known worldwide as the capital of classical music (for its musical legacy, and because famous composers such as Beethoven and Mozart called it home). It is also famous for its high quality of life. In the last two decades (2000–2020), the city has ranked at the top of many global

166  Miranda Plowden et al. surveys of living conditions (see, for example, Mercer, 2021; The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2021). In addition to providing clean water, clean air, adequate food, and shelter, as one of the world’s most liveable cities, Vienna also generates a sense of community and offers hospitable settings for all, especially young people, to develop social skills, a sense of autonomy and identity. It is also one of the wealthiest regions in the European Union, with a relative gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in 2018 at EUR 51,000 (in comparison to the EU average EUR 31,000; EU’s highest EUR 98,600 in Luxembourg; and EU’s lowest EUR 5,200 in Severozapaden, Bulgaria) (Eurostat, 2020). In light of this, it is perhaps no surprise that Vienna has a commitment to quality and inclusivity that makes its social housing amongst the most popular in the world (Municipal Dreams in Housing, 2020). This is important because “social housing” tends to be associated with housing provided for people on low incomes or with particular needs. It should be noted that there are various definitions of social housing and the percentage of social housing, as a proportion of the housing stock in different countries, ranges from 4 to 35% across Europe and internationally (Whitehead and Scanlon, 2007). In Austria and Sweden, social housing is available to all households, and Austria has been particularly effective at expanding the output of social housing (ibid). It is this ethos of equality that is central to the client perspective in Vienna: What makes Vienna unique is that you cannot tell how much someone earns simply by looking at their home address. (Kathrin Gaál, Vienna’s lead councillor for housing, in Forrest, 2019) The city’s schemes are generally held to be at the forefront of progressive planning policy and sustainable design (Forrest, 2019). For further discussion on planning, please see Chapter 13. Alt-Erlaa housing estate is one of the contemporary showpieces in Vienna. It is really a satellite town South-West of Vienna’s city centre, with 3,172 homes and a population of 10,000 (Municipal Dreams in Housing, 2020). Alt-Erlaa is the brainchild of architect Harry Glüc and was built between 1973 and 1986, with the ideals of creating a green and pleasant environment, “close to nature and water”. It’s variety of social infrastructure includes facilities for sports and children, a church, a multipurpose hall, health centres, and a local shopping centre, which are focused at the heart of the development (ibid). Social value is inherent to the Vienna business model and helps achieve SDGs 3 Good health and well-being, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, and 12 Responsible consumption and production.

A client perspective  167 Ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all, at all ages (SDG 3), is central to the value base of the client, and the design of the town, buildings, infrastructure, and facilities. Although very few of the specific targets are directly relevant to this setting, by creating the most liveable city, Vienna is, for example, strengthening the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol (target 3.5) and substantially reducing the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination (target 3.8). The progressive planning policy and sustainable design are helping to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable (SDG 11) and enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries (target 11.3). The planning policy is an exemplar of responsible and sustainable consumption and production (SDG 12) and aligned with promoting public procurement practices that are sustainable (target 12.7). Additionally, SDGs 10: Reduced inequalities, and SDG 15: Life on land are important. Specifically, supporting sustained financial well-being by making social housing available to all (target 10.1); promoting the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status (target 10.2); ensuring equal opportunity and reducing inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies, and action in this regard (target 10.3); and integrating ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies, and accounts (target 15.9) are all evidently central to this client’s ethos. For further information, see Alt-Erlaa housing estate, Vienna, Austria: https://municipaldreams.wordpress.com/2020/04/07/alt-erlaa-vienna-theworlds-best-council-housing/ Whitehead, C. and Scanlon, K. (Eds.) (2007) Social housing in Europe, London: London School of Economics and Political Science, ISBN: 978-0-85328-100-9 Baldwin Hess, D., Tammaru, T. and van Ham, M. (Eds.) (2018) Housing estates in Europe: Poverty, ethnic segregation and policy challenges, SpringOpen, ISBN 978-3-319-92813-5

168  Miranda Plowden et al. Klinenberg, E. (2018) Palaces for the people: How to build a more equal & United Society, London: Vintage. Bredenoord, J., van Lindert, P. and Smets, P. (eds) (2014) Affordable housing in the urban Global South: Seeking sustainable solutions, Abingdon: Routledge. Huchzermeyer, M. (2011) Tenement cities: From 19th century Berlin to 21st century Nairobi, Trenton: Africa World Press.

Chapter summary The above case studies illustrate that every project is different and will need specific actions to deliver on its full potential. However, there are a number of themes that run through all of the case studies that are critical in commissioning capital projects that achieve positive social, environmental, and economic impacts: • • • • •

A strong vision and brief co-produced with end users (customers and maintenance teams) in mind. A compact client team that takes a facilitative role in coordinating the contributions of all stakeholders. The right design team for the project selected by key stakeholders in the project. A “twin experts” approach to the project development process that allows for mutual respect and two-way dialogue between clients and commissioned professionals. Stamina and a willingness for the project participants to hold their nerve throughout the process – delivering excellent projects takes time, hard graft, and patience.

References Bloom (2020) Bloom procurement services, Gateshead: Bloom Procurement Services Ltd, https://bloom.services/ [accessed 9 December 2020]. CABE (2002) Client guide for arts capital programme projects, London: Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE). Eurostat (2020) GDP per capita in EU regions, Eurostat News Release, 5 March, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/10474907/1-05032020-AP-EN. pdf/81807e19-e4c8-2e53-c98a-933f5bf30f58 [accessed 10 March 2021]. Forrest, A. (2019) Vienna’s affordable housing paradise, HuffPost, https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/vienna-affordable-housing-paradise_n_5b4e0b12e4b0b15aba88c7b0?ri18n=true [accessed 10 March 2021]. Mercer (2021) Quality of living city ranking, Mercer LLC, https://www.eiu.com/public/ topical_report.aspx?campaignid=Liveability2019 [accessed 10 March 2021]. Municipal Dreams in Housing (2020) Alt-Erlaa, Vienna: ‘The World’s best council housing?’ https://municipaldreams.wordpress.com/2020/04/07/alt-erlaa-viennathe-worlds-best-council-housing/ [accessed 10 March 2021].

A client perspective  169 Plowden, M. (2021) Asset based community development: What’s changed in 20 years? Looking back at SOAR’s neighbourhood strategies, a community-led neighbourhood planning process in north Sheffield, https://www.mirandaplowden.com/projects/asset-based-community-development-whats-changed-in-20-years [accessed 9 March 2021]. Sheffield City Council (2002) Southey Owlerton regeneration framework, Sheffield: Sheffield City Council, https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content/dam/sheffield/docs/ planning-and-development/beyond-city/sou-ndf/Southey%20Owlerton%20Regeneration%20Framework.pdf [accessed 14 April 2021]. South Yorkshire Housing Association (2020) Strategic plan, Sheffield: South Yorkshire Housing Association Ltd, https://www.syha.co.uk/who-we-are/what-we-do/ our-strategic-plan/ [accessed 9 December 2020]. The Economist Intelligence Unit (2021) The Global Liveability Index 2019, The Economist, https://www.eiu.com/public/topical_report.aspx?campaignid=Liveability2019 [accessed 10 March 2021]. Whitehead, C. and Scanlon, K. (Eds.) (2007) Social housing in Europe, London: London School of Economics and Political Science, ISBN: 978-0-85328-100-9

10 A contractor’s perspective on social value James Willcox, Andrew King and Ani Raiden

This chapter presents a contractor’s perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value. Our focus on Willmott Dixon allows us to chart how an organisation at the centre of the evolving social value landscape has developed their approach over time. Practical insights are provided on establishing their Foundation, researching with partner organisations, contributing to Government initiatives, integrating social value into the

• • • • •

Commitment to staff training and development Management trainees and apprenticeships 4Life Academy Trainee Challenge Charity work with Chestnut Tree House

• • •

Spend on Social Enterprises, aim to have Social Enterprise on all sites Tackling youth unemployment and inspiring young people, Tackling social exclusion, supporting community transformation

• • • •

Believe in enhancing diversity Gender steering group Ex Forces covenant, Care Leaver covenant Financial Times award for leadersh ip on workplace diversity and inclusion, Women in construction award

• • • •

Research collaborations Contributions to Government initiatives Work with Social Value Portal to develop the national TOMs Partnerships with other main contractors and supply chain firms to support apprenticeship programmes

Figure 10.1 A contractor perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-12

A contractor’s perspective  171 business, introducing social value plans and accounts, winning awards, and co-creating social value. We detail key learning points and discuss the company’s current social value priorities and thinking on measuring social value. We also demonstrate how their approach can help achieve selected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specifically, 4 Quality education, 8 Decent work and economic growth, 10 Reduced inequalities, and 17 Partnerships for the goals, as well as 5 Gender equality, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, and 13 Climate Action.

Willmott Dixon is a privately owned contracting and fit-out group with a turnover approaching £1 billion. It was founded in 1852 and is still led by the Willmott family. It seeks to deliver brilliant buildings, transform lives, strengthen communities, and enhance the environment for future generations (Willmott Dixon, 2021a). For almost 150 years, the Willmott family has had people and the community at the heart of what they do. That has grown over the years, and with the introduction of the Social Value Act in the UK, it felt like the importance of this was being ‘enforced’. Given that the visibility and social value activity increased at that time, it could look like people and organisations were jumping on the bandwagon or doing it for the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). What Willmott Dixon wants everyone to know is that having a social purpose is in their DNA, and the people who work for the company and their supply chain partners hold similar values. It’s not a numbers game, it comes from the heart. (James Willcox) Long before the term social value was coined, Willmott Dixon was carrying out charitable works in the areas in which they build. This is visible in the company’s 1978 report and accounts which state: At Willmotts we have, for a long time… provided aid not only in financial terms but in the service of our employees to many organisations.

Key learning points There are three key learning points to take away from Willmott Dixon’s social value journey: 1 2 3

Social value is integral to the company mission, vision, strategy, and business model – not simply ‘added value’ Measuring social value is popular, but very challenging, and Partnerships are central to social value.

We now provide a brief overview of the key points before delving into more detail.

172  James Willcox et al. 1. Social value is integral to the company mission, vision, strategy, and business model – not simply ‘added value’ Construction, fit-out, and refurbishment are what Willmott Dixon do, but importantly how they do it and how they run the business are central to their strategic decision-making. They aim to continually increase the impact of what they do, and they seek to address the commercial aspects of their social value offer. They work with a wide range of clients, and whilst some are highly knowledgeable about social value and how well Willmott Dixon performs in the area, others initially have little awareness. Willmott Dixon wants to lead the way in encouraging clients and end users to consider, create, and deliver social value. Benchmarking of competitor activity reveals that at times others have been smarter. For example, as highlighted in Table 10.2, there was a realisation that at one point everyone else was counting everything as social value in their Social Return on Investment (SROI), including local labour and local spend, whilst Willmott Dixon more precisely worked to Social Value Principle 5 (Social Value UK, 2020) which argues that a spend that would have occurred anyway should not be included in calculations of social value. As a result, Willmott Dixon was underselling what they do in comparison to their competitors. At the same time, the company’s social value offer has become quite complex to articulate, and there isn’t a simple approach to record and share what they do that is bespoke to a particular area. The company approach attracts people to work and stay working for Willmott Dixon, and it is striking how much people want to take part in creating social value, albeit that it may not always be coordinated or strategic. For staff to feel a connection with their work and that it matters to them are very important to Willmott Dixon and relate to their prosocial social value orientation (see Chapter 2 for further discussion on social value orientation). 2. Measuring social value is popular but very challenging We know what gets measured gets managed, but it is new science and so it is a flawed system. (James Willcox) Willmott Dixon works with the national TOMs, but they are aware of other measurement systems that offer different ways to calculate SROI and/or impact. It is human nature to focus on achieving a target that has been set; equally, it is human nature that there are often unintended consequences, such as finding creative ways to ‘tick the box’. Looking at the SROI, we have to accept that the numbers don’t always reflect the effort put in. There is a risk in chasing certain proxies if there are no alternative avenues to showing success. As the ideals of social value become increasingly important and the technical vocabulary related to measuring social value continues to develop, social value is increasingly resembling an industry in its own right. There is huge complexity

A contractor’s perspective  173 in the nuances of measuring social value, which means that it is not always accessible to industry practitioners. For example, the Willmott Dixon Foundation ‘Young people’ target to transform vis-à-vis enhance lives is not directly compatible with SROI in a straightforward manner because of terminology. In order to qualify as a measure that represents ‘transformation’, the impact must be relatable and measurable under a TOM. This can cause some confusion to those outside (and within!) the business. Effectively, a translation process is required, and this can become a distraction and steal attention away from considering, creating, and delivering social value. 3. Partnerships are central to social value Partnerships with other contractors, research organisations, Government bodies, charities, and other stakeholder groups are central to considering, creating, and delivering social value. Willmott Dixon seeks to join forces with others to make sure that they are effective. They connect with prisoners, schools, third party agencies, benchmarking and standards organisations, and others to find out what is important to their various stakeholders.

Social value journey Table 10.1 overleaf shows the company’s social value journey from 2010 to 2021. The Foundation The Willmott Dixon Foundation guides, monitors, and collates the social and community investment activities of their employees; it helps people thrive using their skills, experience, and know-how to make a tangible difference (Willmott Dixon, 2021b). Importantly, the focus is on working with a wide range of stakeholders to identify local needs and priorities and develop bespoke activities to suit: Every community is different, so we work with our customers and other stakeholders to identify local needs and priorities and then develop activities which will have the most benefit. (Willmott Dixon, 2021c) The Foundation journey began years before it was officially formed in 2010 at a time of increasing austerity. During an internal yearly review discussion turned to preparing to successfully weather the recession. Jonathon Porritt,1 Non-Executive Director, who has played a central role in shaping, directing, and guiding Willmott Dixon’s position on sustainable development and social investment, said ‘prove it’ when claims were made that the

174  James Willcox et al. Table 10.1 Willmott Dixon journey on social value 2010–2021 Timeline

Internally

Externally

2010

Preparing to weather the recession. Willmott Dixon Foundation established as an entity. Landmark year in community engagement and investment. Launch of the Willmott Dixon Foundation with a key theme to tackle social exclusion and anti-social behaviour. Development of the company approach and understanding of social impact and social value begun. First time to try and quantify investment in community and good causes. Launch of the sustainability strategy. Started recording social value activity on spreadsheets and set a solid foundation for the future reporting. Helped shape customer thinking in relation to delivering their obligations under the Social Value Act, through the Transforming Communities report. Set ‘the young people’ target. Worked on understanding what impact means to the company. Launched Trainee Challenge. Started to tell company stories and published the first Foundation annual review. Started one of the first long-term charity initiatives with Chestnut Tree House. Board buy-in for social value, thereby making it part of business. Started to think more strategically:

Austerity. From labour to conservative Government. Research in partnership with

2012

2013

2014

2015

• •

Employed teachers in community teams IT developed a system to aid data capture.

Met the ‘young people enhancing the life chances’ target and increased it to 10,000. Published company report ‘Social Value – taking full account of a company’s true impact’. 2016

MiProject development community investment logged. Launch of gender steering group. Started to venture beyond young people – thinking about people who faced real barriers and working with prisons (for example, Prescoed and Elmley facilities) with ‘ad hoc ready for the gate’ style programmes.

• • • •

Construction Youth Trust Social Value Portal Business in the Community London Benchmarking.

Key contributor to Government’s review of the Social Value Act; recognised as an example of good practice. Social Value Act came into force. Building magazine’s Major Contractor of the Year award. Women in construction award. Coveted Queen’s Award for Enterprise for exemplary work in the field of Sustainable Development. Partnership’s 4life academy.

People taking notice and thinking about how they could be involved. Public sector beginning to think ‘what does social value mean for us’. Social value increasingly included in tenders. Contributed to Cabinet-officebacked social value project.

Part of Government-backed Social Value Task Force; developing the TOMs as a new way of measuring social value. Only private sector company to present at the launch of the Social Value Maturity Index at Portcullis House.

A contractor’s perspective  175 Timeline

Internally

Externally

2017

Introduced the Social Value Account: using SROI and embedding in company systems and reporting. Started reporting SROI on Framework projects. Started to recognise the value in programmes of works vs individual ad hoc interventions. Signed arms forces covenant ‘Ex Forces work experience’. Commercial commitments driving social value activities as much as the Young People target. Customer feedback suggests we weren’t really listening and instead are seen as driving our company agenda. MiSocial portal launched to record and plan social value: by the end of 2018, 22% of all projects and 55% of Framework projects have a Social Value Account. Increasing the visibility of what the Foundation is doing internally. The first Building Lives Academy Launched. Social Value programmes beginning to be identified and organised by community teams. Starting to make the links between social value and the business more explicit. Achieved the Young People Target a year early: 10,000 enhancements over 480,000 interactions. At the end of 2019, 30% of all projects and 60% of Framework projects have a Social Value Account. Co-creation of opportunities with customers. Visibility of planning and delivery of social value.

Part of the discussion at the House of Commons debate on the future of Social Value. Win giving something back award at the Times Top 100 Best Companies Awards and are awarded fourteenth best company to work for in the UK.

Modern Slavery policy, and new policies on Equality and Diversity, and Sustainable Procurement. Launch Now or Never Strategy (https:// www.willmottdixon.co.uk/now-ornever) fully integrating social value and sustainability to reflect the merging environmental and societal challenges we are facing. The strategy sets new targets under the Brilliant Buildings, Building Lives and Better Planet themes. Social value activities under the Building Lives theme have to be re-imagined and delivered to support changing requirements due to Covid 19.

UK’s highest placed company in the FT’s inaugural list of European leaders for workplace diversity and inclusion. Fifth Best Company to Work for in the Times Best Companies. EDIE AWARDs team of the year for the sustainably team. HR excellence Awards: Rick Willmott named ‘Best peoplefocused CEO of the year’

2018

2019

2020

2021

Social value becoming a commercial demand. Realisation that many people and organisations are getting really good at this stuff too. Queens Award for promoting opportunity: 51% of management trainees recruited were women. Showcased in London Business Groups’ annual guidance manual. Signed up to Care Leaver Covenant.

Queen’s Award for Enterprise on Sustainable Development.

First Contractor and one of only three companies globally to achieve the carbon trust level 3 supply chain standard.

176  James Willcox et al. company was creating social value, and this led to the Foundation being established as an entity. Whilst Willmott Dixon has always carried out a significant amount of community engagement and investment, 2012 proved a landmark year with the launch of the Willmott Dixon Foundation. The Foundation Board had established the Foundation’s theme as tackling social exclusion and anti-social behaviour. Work began to agree to a headline target, and the development of the approach to community investment and understanding of social impact and social value. Two years later, in 2014, the Foundation started sharing success stories and published the first Foundation annual review. A core target was announced: to improve and transform the life chances of 10,000 young people by 2020 with a focus on: • Youth unemployment and inspiring young people, • Social exclusion, • Community transformation. In 2017, the first Foundation Celebration was held. This was an event to share stories across the company, to ‘plant some seeds for the future’, challenge thinking, and also celebrate achievements. The UK CEO of Social Enterprise was invited to talk and inspire further work. More staff started getting involved in delivering socially, and this provided them an opportunity to manifest their prosocial social value orientation. In 2019, the target to enhance the life chances of 10,000 young people was met. For further information about how Willmott Dixon works with young people, see https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/the-willmott-dixon-foundation/ case-studies/technopreneurship For further information about the Foundation, achievements and impact are available via the annual reports; for example, for 2020, see https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/the-willmott-dixon-foundation/ annual-review-2020/impact-2020 Training and skills development Willmott Dixon is committed to training and development. They see it as an important aspect of every employee achieving their full potential, and central to the company remaining an industry leader. They run extensive management trainee and apprenticeship programmes such as ‘Opening Doors’ (see Chapter 5 for further information about degree apprenticeship programmes). There are also focused initiatives that target specific skills development. In 2013, the property repairs and maintenance part of the Willmott Dixon

A contractor’s perspective  177 family that provides their services to local authorities and housing associations (then called the Willmott Dixon Partnerships, now rebranded as Fortem) opened a ‘4Life Academy’. The 4Life Academy is a National Centre of Excellence based in Birmingham that provides training and lifelong skills to over 2,000 people a year. They deliver bespoke training packages with a commitment to helping local businesses and individuals. The packages are tailored from a variety of training courses on offer, including renewable technology and Green Deal training. They work to a ‘Skills 4 Life’ training model, which aims to produce the best tradespeople within the sector and assist personal development. In 2014, the Foundation launched a ‘Trainee Challenge’. The brief asked the trainees to identify, plan, and deliver a project that would leave a lasting legacy in the local community, in support of the aims of the Willmott Dixon Foundation. The main aim was to elicit positive change through donations of time and skills although fundraising was part of the challenge too. The project proved such a success that it continues each year, with management trainees from across the company being nominated to take part. One of the first long-term charity initiatives with Chestnut Tree House started in the same year. Focus was firmly on young people as the company’s work in schools was increasing at this time. Willmott Dixon began to develop different relationships with schools as they moved from ‘just’ doing assemblies and open-door activities to thinking about work experience programmes and apprenticeships as a way to really improve someone’s life chances. The initial target to enhance the life chances of 3,000 young people by 2015 was exceeded, with 3,390 included by the end of 2015. Driven by the ‘Young People’ target and commercial Framework KPIs, the company started to recognise the value in programmes of works rather than individual ad hoc interventions. In 2017, there was a recognition that building lasting relationships with young people and project partners would ultimately deliver much more powerful and longer-term outcomes. Willmott Dixon delivered assemblies at schools, careers talks, and other high-volume, low-value events. They also set up a range of high-value initiatives, such as the Skills Hubs up at Wolverhampton and Perry Barr, where they used a project as an anchor to start a longer-term skills and training programme that delivers a qualification and a guaranteed job interview at the end. In the best cases, this has resulted in work and employment. Sharing this across different contractors, as at Perry Barr, also had further benefits. When Willmott Dixon engaged with three to four other main contractors, their supply chains, and their programmes of work, the opportunities for training, work experience, and potential employment were multiplied. It is difficult to complete a two- to three-year groundworks apprenticeship on a single project. With access to a bigger programme of works, and with a

178  James Willcox et al. coordinated approach from the principal contractors, apprentices can move from job to job as needed to complete their apprenticeship. This is a powerful and beneficial approach, albeit it does create complexity around measuring social value in terms of deciding which contractor can claim the benefit. In 2018, the first Building Lives Academy was launched in New Addington, which is a partnership with MRG Services, Carshalton College, and Croydon Council’s job brokerage service Croydon Works. It is operated with the aim to upskill local people and give them a platform for long-term careers success. The project provides opportunities for training and employment locally as well as easing the construction skills gap and labour shortages. For further information, see https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/blog/ building-lives-less-ordinary1 Community work During the early years of the Willmott Dixon Foundation, Willmott Dixon’s Partnerships, which was the property repairs and maintenance part of the Willmott Dixon family, focused on servicing local authorities and housing associations (now rebranded as Fortem). They worked directly with communities; in capital works, the company activities were limited to community engagement work steered by the Considerate Constructor Schemes (see https://www.ccscheme.org.uk/). As the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 came into force in 2013, it helped to shape customers’ thinking in relation to delivering their obligations under the Act with support from Willmott Dixon ‘Transforming Communities’ report (Willmott Dixon, 2013a, 2013b). The report offered guidance on how public authorities and registered providers can leverage construction and housing repairs contracts to deliver additional social value to local communities. Whilst people in the business have always volunteered and done community work, by 2018, the company started to see a shift in some parts of the business where social value programmes were identified and organised by community teams and delivered by Willmott Dixon employees. This provided another opportunity for staff to manifest their prosocial social value orientation. Work with partner organisations and the Government From the early years of the Willmott Dixon Foundation, the company engaged with a range of partner organisations and Government bodies to work on research projects, including (but not limited to): • •

Construction Youth Trust Social Value Portal

A contractor’s perspective  179 • •

Business in the Community London Benchmarking Group.

This helped shape, direct, and guide the company’s position on sustainable development and social investment. In 2012, Willmott Dixon was a key contributor to the UK Government’s review of the Social Value Act and was also recognised as an example of good practice. In 2015, they contributed to a Cabinet Office-backed social value project, and in 2016, being part of a Social Value Task Force gave the company an opportunity to join with other leading protagonists to participate in developing the TOMs (see Chapter 15) as a new way of measuring social value. The Social Value Task Force was formed in 2016 to establish a good practice framework to integrate the Public Services (Social Value Act) 2012 into the UK public sector and business community. This was a Local Government Association initiative to create healthy, thriving, and resilient communities by embedding social value into all public sector activities. This is achieved through the services that are commissioned and procured, and by maximising supply chain engagement with communities in how they deliver these services. Willmott Dixon also actively participated in the trialling and reworking of the TOMs with their Foundation team and the Social Value Portal. Their involvement continued in 2017 as part of the discussion at the House of Commons Debate on the future of social value with Chris White (the author of the Social Value Act and subsequent ‘Our Money, Our Future’ report, https://www.socialenterprise.org.uk/policy-and-researchreports/our-money-our-future/). This discussion led to the recent review, which Willmott Dixon also provided feedback for during the consultation period. Covenants Willmott Dixon believes in their diverse workforce that contributes across all levels of the company; indeed, they see diversity as essential to their future success. In 2016, the company launched their gender steering group together with local action groups, and they have since annually reported, for example, on the gender pay-gap and the percentage of trainees that are women. Their targets on this metric increase year on year and have been achieved in 2018 and 2019. They also promote greater diversity and an increase in women with senior-level leadership roles in construction. In 2019, Willmott Dixon was the UK’s highest placed company to appear in the Financial Times’ inaugural list of European leaders for workplace diversity and inclusion, coming third out of 700 organisations ranked for their approach to inclusivity. Their approach extends beyond young people and gender to consider people who have faced real barriers to work, such as their focus on collaborating with

180  James Willcox et al. prisons. On the Prescoed and Elmley facilities, they developed ‘ad hoc ready for the gate’ style programmes to help offenders rebuild their lives. They are now moving to a more strategic approach working with partners such as Key for Life and New Futures Network to provide training, work experience, and careers for people who want an opportunity after they have served their time. For further information, see https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/the-willmott-dixon-foundation/ case-studies/ready-for-the-gate-programme In 2017, Willmott Dixon signed their armed forces covenant, which published their commitment to support service leavers and veterans to join the company for a career in construction. The approach is driven by their employees and by 2020 had led to over a dozen people being employed by Willmott Dixon. They have found that although a full range of careers are available, compliance-based roles such as those in health and safety particularity suit these individuals well. One of their current quantity surveying apprentices is also ex-armed forces. In 2018, the company signed up to a Care Leaver Covenant. This signals their commitment to supporting care leavers by providing them with construction career guidance, employability sessions, placements, and work experience. In 2020, Willmott Dixon published their Modern Slavery policy together with new policies on Equality and Diversity, and Sustainable Procurement. For further information, see https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/our-approach/promoting-diversity. Social Value Accounts and Social Return on Investment (SROI) At the time of the launch of the Willmott Dixon Foundation in 2012, the company tried to quantify their investment in community work and good causes for the first time. The figure came to £1.13million, with a further £95,500 added through the direct fundraising activities of staff (although they suspect that this was underestimating the real value). A year later, in 2013, the company started more precisely recording their activity and investment increased to £1.37 million. Data was collated in accordance with the standards of London Benchmarking Group (now rebranded as Business for Societal Impact: B4SI), of which Willmott Dixon remains a member, and verified by Bureau Veritas. This set a solid foundation for all future reporting. The London Benchmarking Group was formed in 1994 to measure and manage corporate community investment. Their framework is based on a measurement standard that companies can apply to understand the difference their contributions make to business and society. Around 180 companies are members, including Marks and Spencer, IBM, and NatWest. For further information, see http://www.lbg-online.net/framework/ community-investment/

A contractor’s perspective  181 In 2015, Willmott Dixon published a report ‘Social Value – taking full account of a company’s true impact’, which was supported by Rt Hon Hazel Blears who wrote the foreword. In association with MadebyPI, Willmott Dixon developed a system to assist data capture. The following year, in 2016, Willmott Dixon was the only private sector company to be present at the launch of the Social Value Maturity Index at Portcullis House. The Social Value Maturity Index is one method for determining where an organisation is on the social value journey in comparison to their competitors and it helps to articulate the next steps to further integrating social value into core business functions. (For details, see Chapter 15.) As discussed earlier, the company was also part of the Government-backed Social Value Task Force and participated in the development of the TOMs as a new way to measure social value (see Chapter 15). Willmott Dixon was keen to demonstrate how serious social value is to the business but found that confusing communications made this difficult to convey at the time. Their evolution continued with the development of ‘MiProject’, which is a bespoke Willmott Dixon portal that enables community investment and other data (such as safety, health and environment, and other KPIs) to be logged and benchmarked against the performance of 250+ projects using a set of key industry targets. The service is updated in real time and it reports on the progress and results of each project. It is accessed by clients and employees. The many benefits include significantly reduced administration time and enhanced data management and reporting, aligning their performance criteria in one system, and an increased tender success rate. In 2017, the company followed these developments with the introduction of ‘Social Value Accounts’, which use SROI as a way of valuing the impact of the company activities and embedding it in their systems and reporting. SROI uses proxy financial data provided by an independent external expert to provide an idea of the value of specific interventions to society. (See Chapter 15 for further information on SROI.) Willmott Dixon started reporting SROI on Framework projects. By 2018, social value had become a commercial factor in winning new business. The company experienced social value award criteria being increased to 20–25% of the overall tender evaluation on public sector work in Birmingham and Manchester. Social value formed part of their customer feedback, became more important to employees, and their success in this area was increasingly used to attract new clients to the company. By the end of 2018, within Willmott Dixon, 22% of all projects and 55% of their Framework projects had a Social Value Account. In 2018, Willmott Dixon also launched their ‘MiSocial portal’, which allows the company to record and plan social value activities, report SROI, and create project Social Value Accounts that are related to the national TOMs. The system helps to increase the visibility of what the Foundation is doing within the company and to customers as the company Board has oneclick access to reporting functionality for community teams.

182  James Willcox et al. Since 2019, Willmott Dixon has worked to meet dual commitments on their projects: employment and skills plans, and reporting impact using SROI. Given that social value is an integral part of the way the company works, their commercial commitments drive social value activities as much as their ‘Young People’ target, a demand on the business that means their teams are often stretched. At the end of 2019, 30% of all projects, and 60% of Framework projects, had a Social Value Account which helps support the creation of the following benefits:

Challenges in creating and delivering vs measuring social value The dual commitment is very tricky: there are commercial commitments relating to, for example, local spend and employing local labour that are often cascaded as a Framework requirement as part of ‘Employment and Skills Plans’. They can have as much, if not more of, an influence and positive social impact, than any targets under the SROI in driving priorities on a project, since underperforming in these areas will harm Framework reputation. Some of these targets are not the most appropriate for delivering actual benefit. Although Willmott Dixon might be spending a certain percentage with their supply chain within a 50-mile radius as part of the Employment and Skills Plan, Social Value Principle 5 (Social Value UK, 2020) argues that this spend would have occurred anyway and hence should not be included in calculations of social value. Thus, for contractors who have regional divisions in their businesses, their supply chains are understandably local, with the exception of specialist packages (or where choice of supplier is poor), and hence their ability to demonstrate the social impact of local spend is correspondingly very limited. Ironically, this can sometimes impact higher value packages such as modular construction. The same issue impacts apprentices. Willmott Dixon does not directly employ apprentices regularly, nor do they directly employ any labour regularly, and so their main apprentice contribution to the Employment and Skills Plan comes from supply chain apprentices that were already in place, not the new ones created as a result of the project. In this way, seeing social value as ‘added value’ actually negates the incentive for an organisation to do the very things that are seen as the right thing to do: spend locally using local supply chain partners and employing local labour. This creates a conflict of interest between doing the right thing commercially and for the KPIs, and doing the right thing for meaningful, project-initiated benefits.

A contractor’s perspective  183 1 2 3 4

Co-create opportunities with the customer Different reporting functions for the customer, which show value in monetary terms Visibility in planning and delivery of social value Calculation of a headline summary figure, for example, in 2019 Willmott Dixon delivered at least a £30 million SROI.

To ensure a qualitative assessment of social value activities, Willmott Dixon also requires to have an impact assessment completed by the beneficiaries; 60% of activities are targeted to have these qualitative assessments completed (please see Chapter 14 for further discussion about assessing and measuring social value). For further information, see https://www.madebypi.co.uk/our-work/ willmott-dixon-miproject/ Strategy and awards One notable recognition of Willmott Dixon’s commitment to considering, creating, and delivering social value is the extensive list of awards they have won over the years, including, but not limited to: • • • • • • • • • •

Building magazine’s Major Contractor of the Year for the second time in three years (2013) Women in construction award (2013) Queen’s Award for Enterprise for exemplary work in the field of Sustainable Development, a new and exciting pan-industry benchmark for the Group (2013) Business Green Leaders’ Awards Sustainability Team of the Year (2014) Investors in People Awards: Excellence in Social Responsibility (2014) Queens Award for promoting opportunity (2018) Business in the Community Mark for outstanding investment in social infrastructure (2014) Queen’s Award for Enterprise on Sustainable Development for the second time (2019) The Rotherham Athena Awards: Training manager Sharon Ayles (Fortem) as Businesswoman of the Year (2020) (Fortem is part of the Willmott Dixon group) HR excellence Awards 2020: Rick Willmott named ‘Best people-focused CEO of the year’.

These accolades are the result of the company’s lifelong commitment to social value that extends far beyond the more general rise in awareness

184  James Willcox et al. witnessed since the Public Services (Social Value) Act came into force in 2013 in the UK. In that same year, Willmott Dixon launched their sustainability strategy, and by 2015 the company felt that they were starting to really lead on the social value agenda and their people, partner organisations, and clients were not only taking notice of their work, but also began thinking about how they could get involved. Two years on from the Social Value Act, people in the public sector were asking, ‘What does that mean for me?’. Willmott Dixon saw social value increasingly creeping into the commercial world as it started to be given more attention at tender stage. As a consequence, social value became more relevant to companies with a public sector focus. Willmott Dixon had Board buy-in and started to think more strategically about social value as a central part of their business. They employed teachers in community teams as their Social Value Managers because they properly understand the constraints faced by the industry and the procedures for getting programmes certified. For example, the virtual work experience programme Willmott Dixon developed and delivered in partnership with Speakers for Schools during 2020 met all the Gatsby benchmarks and could therefore be industry-certified. However, by 2018, feedback from customers revealed that on occasion they felt that the company wasn’t really listening to what they needed or wanted. Instead, they felt that Willmott Dixon was driving their own agenda. At the same time, evidence from others in the industry signalled that competitors were getting really good at social value too, a factor that eroded Willmott Dixon’s competitive advantage. The company response was strategic; in the Now or Never strategy, Willmott Dixon’s focus puts community and customer need at its core and makes visible the links between the work of the Foundation and the other parts of the business. Forexample, the aim to achieve Gender Parity by 2030 (51% of new management trainees to be women), and to attract the next generation of young people through careers events at schools, was explicitly linked to the engagement of Willmott Dixon employees, the company culture, and creating and delivering social value. This approach resulted in the company being showcased in the B4SI annual guidance manual.

Social value priorities A key priority for Willmott Dixon has been their focus on impact, which remains ‘the holy grail’. They seek to make a difference where the customers wants them to, and where the customer does not have a clear purpose, the company will help them understand what is important to their communities and explain the key focus areas that are central to the Willmott Dixon Foundation and how these could be applied to the clients own communities. The company acknowledges that customers’ focus

A contractor’s perspective  185 areas will vary and whilst young people will always be a demographic where Willmott Dixon can add value, recent reflections on their social value journey have led them to understand that this can limit their activity and impact. They are now aware that the biggest impact the company can make is with people who have to overcome barriers irrespective of age, for example, ex-offenders or care leavers. Willmott Dixon is now putting systems in place so that they can see where their most impactful work has been. They are keen to record where people start the journey, not just where they end up. Rather than discounting or devaluing certain activities, in going forward the company wants to recognise every idea, activity, and programme for the value they can contribute. This will include: 1 Starting with Connections, individual or large group activities, planting a seed ‘I could’ 2 Developing Improvements, programmes that deliver change, as in ‘I can now’ 3 Achieving Big Change, which will happen as a sum of many small things transforming lives collectively and over the longer term. Willmott Dixon will seek to count and report everything. These activities will happen in big numbers and they will be driven by the company’s commercial commitments and their continued focus on SROI. Achieving Big Change is at the centre of the target, and where it was only happening in small numbers before, the company is now focused on long-term relationships and the stories of people who have faced barriers and now really experience a difference. They are brave and bold, looking to have around 100 stories of big impact in the next 10 years. At the same time, whilst their strategy is continually evolving, key priorities will build on the company successes so far and incorporate learning from reflections. The aim is to ‘push ourselves so that we continue to lead’ in this space with two key themes: • •

To improve understanding of what is needed and the impact of what they deliver To further integrate social value into the heart of all business processes.

The continuing work on understanding the customer and community better is geared towards developing opportunities to further co-create social value. The first step is to redefine what ‘community’ means. In the future, Willmott Dixon seeks to develop ways to work with customers that will stretch them. Whilst they welcome the generic British Standard 8950 on social value, they also hope to see the industry agreeing to a recognised construction-specific social value standard.

186  James Willcox et al. In terms of further integrating social value into the heart of all business processes, Willmott Dixon is committed to increasing repeatable spend with social enterprises by at least 10% each year. Every project will have a social value plan and at least one social enterprise on site. There is also a specific plan for all the Managing Directors (or nominated directors) of the active category A, or tier-1, supply chain partners in their top five high risk trades to complete modern slavery training by the end of 2021 (Figure 10.2).

Shared values with clients and the supply chain Public sector customers have always had an element of social value in their KPI requirements, and this became more prevalent with the introduction of the Social Value Act. More widely, customers have now started to think about what social value means to them and their communities. Willmott Dixon focus on bespoke social value plans, researching the local authority’s community growth plans, speaking to local community organisations, and generally digging into the key issues in specific areas. This has helped the company to make lasting impacts in the communities where they work. Many of the local authority customers have started using the national TOMs. This has made collating and reporting KPIs much easier and clearer as everyone is speaking the same language.

•Customer needs •Evaluating impact •Recognised standard

•Redefining 'community' •Co-creating •Evaluating impact

UNDERSTAND

•Increasing repeatable spend with Social Enterprises •Directors of key supplychain partners to complete Modern Slavery training by end of 2021

Customers

Communities

Ethical supply chain

Business & projects

INTEGRATE

•Every project to have a social value plan •Every project to have a Social Enterprise on site

Figure 10.2 Social value priorities – improving understanding and further integrating social value into the heart of all business processes.

A contractor’s perspective  187 Willmott Dixon supply chain partners share their values and support many of their community activities. Equally, Willmott Dixon invests in supporting their supply chain partners in achieving their specific social value goals. They help their partner organisations to understand what their drivers are, identify what have they done to date, and where they want to be. They also introduce them to a measuring tool and facilitate the capture of past activity to aid development of a focused strategy to move forward with. The supply chain partners are invited on Willmott Dixon training events to upskill them and help grow their businesses. Social value targets are added to all supply chain contracts and are monitored each month. Willmott Dixon collates the data and includes it in their Social Value Accounts. This allows a true reflection of the social impact of the whole project to be achieved, not just Willmott Dixon’s impact.

Measuring social value With regard to measuring social value, a good starting point is to look back before you can move forward. Whilst there are a number of different measuring tools available, Willmott Dixon suggests those new to the exercise ‘pick one, for example the B4SI framework, and start collating what you did last year’ (see Chapters 14 and 15 for a selection of tools). This will start to build a picture of what has been achieved so far, and more importantly, it shows where efforts may be wasted by identifying resource-intensive activity that yields little or no impact. They also suggest being clear on ‘why you are measuring’ and what the data will be used for. Some pointers include the way that measuring helps with story-telling and provides evidence-based figures for reports. That said, measuring social value can be very hard: it is subjective and emotive. When people put their hearts into a project, or commit to supporting and developing a person, it can be difficult to then put that information into a ‘measuring tool’, give it a monetary figure, and possibly find out that the effort or activity has no real value at all. This is amplified when the impact for the individual(s) in question could have been life changing. Not everyone agrees with what constitutes ‘social impact’. We leave it to the experts. Finally, three key tips on measuring social value: • •

If you manipulate the numbers, then you will never have a true reflection of the impact nor a clear strategy to improve upon. Have a good communication plan. Measuring takes a lot of work, but if you don’t communicate why you are doing it and what you have

188  James Willcox et al.

•

achieved, then its wider impact will be reduced. Think about the key stakeholders for communication, internally and externally. Share your knowledge with other companies. Measuring will focus people to improve society, if we all work together then the impact is bigger.

The specific targets relevant to the SDGs include, with reference to SDG 4 Quality education first, targets 4.3, to ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational, and tertiary education, including university; 4.4, to substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs, and entrepreneurship; and 4.5, to eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations. In relation to SDG 5 Gender equality, targets 5.1, to end all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere; and 5.5, to ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic, and public lives relate to this chapter. In terms of SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth, targets 8.3, to promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalisation and growth of micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services; 8.5, to achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value; 8.6, to substantially reduce the proportion of youth not in employment, education, or training; and, 8.7, to take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery are relevant. Willmott Dixon’s policies and practice with regard to SDG 10 Reduced inequalities relate to targets 10.2, to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status, and 10.3, to ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies, and action in this regard. With regard to SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communities, targets 11.1, to ensure access for all to adequate,

A contractor’s perspective 189 safe, and affordable housing and basic services; 11.3, to enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries; and 11.b, to substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation, and adaptation to climate change. The latter connects to SDG 13 Climate action-related training responds to target 13.3, to improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction, and early warning. Finally, with regard to SDG 17 Partnerships for the goals, Willmott Dixon activities contribute towards target 17.17 to encourage and promote effective public, public-private, and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.

Chapter summary In this chapter, we have shown how Willmott Dixon, a large contractor at the centre of the evolving social value landscape, has developed their approach to considering, creating, and delivering social value over time. We have provided practical insights on establishing their Foundation, researching with partner organisations, contributing to Government initiatives, integrating social value into the business, introducing social value plans and accounts, winning awards, and co-creating social value. We detailed key learning points and discussed the company’s current social value priorities and thinking on measuring social value. We have demonstrated how their approach can help achieve selected SDGs, specifically, 4 Quality education, 8 Decent work and economic growth, 10 Reduced inequalities, and 17 Partnerships for the goals, as well as 5 Gender equality, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, and 13 Climate Action.

Note 1 Jonathon Porritt is also the co-founder of Forum for the Future, the leading sustainable development charity in the UK.

References Social Value UK (2020) What are the principles of social value? Liverpool: Social Value UK, http://www.socialvalueuk.org/what-is-socialvalue/theprinciples-of-social-value/ [accessed 21 December 2020]. Willmott Dixon (2021a) https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/ [accessed 16 March 2021]. Willmott Dixon (2021b) Willmott Dixon Foundation: A purpose beyond profit, https:// www.willmottdixon.co.uk/the-willmott-dixon-foundation [accessed 17 March 2021].

190  James Willcox et al. Willmott Dixon (2021c) Willmott Dixon Foundation: Annual review 2019, https:// www.willmottdixon.co.uk/the-willmott-dixon-foundation/annual-review-2019 [accessed 28 April 2021]. Willmott Dixon (2013a) Transforming Communities Report, https://www.willmottdixon.co.uk/asset/9207/view.pdf [accessed 28 April 2021]. Willmott Dixon (2013b) Ground breaking report aims to drive local skills, https:// www.willmottdixon.co.uk/news/ground-breaking-report-aims-to-drive-localskills [accessed 28 April 2021].

Section III

Placemaking Participative and collaborative design, architecture, and planning Section three of the book focuses on placemaking and collective and participative design. In Chapter 11, Sophia de Sousa discusses the co-design of collaborative economies with case exemplars from the Glass-House Collaborative Design, a London-based national charity that supports communities, organisations, and networks to work collaboratively on the design of buildings, open spaces, homes, and neighbourhoods. In Chapter 12, Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett discuss the praxis, strategy, and tactics in architecture and social value through consideration of their practices: studios Loafalo in Finland and Baxendale in the UK. In Chapter 13, Laura Alvarez demonstrates how Nottingham City Council, a local authority in the UK, took on a leading and enabling role in delivering social value through planning. These contributions invite you to consider social value in terms of placemaking, and how different organisations and community groups can collectively work towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-13

11 Co-designing collaborative economies in design and placemaking Sophia de Sousa

This chapter explores the opportunity for co-designing change and embedding social value through engaging communities in placemaking. It considers the benefits that engagement and co-design can play in improving place quality and equality, as well as project efficiency for those commissioning, leading, and delivering schemes. Through unpicking what each party can bring to a collaborative placemaking process, we begin to unlock that opportunity and enhance social value impact. Through snapshots of interactive engagement activities, we also introduce the basic principles and mechanisms

• • •

• •

• • •

• • •

Drawing on a diverse range of experience, skills, and assets Exploring complex place-based issues and generating ideas for how to tackle them that bring together policy, practice and the importance of cross-sector working Experimenting with simple and easily replicable approaches

Giving voice to people of all ages, members of the local community, and professionals, students and academics, and civic societies Empowering and promoting social, economic, and political inclusivity for all

Local authorities as enablers and the glue for collaborative placemaking that views social value as both a priority and condition for shaping the local area Working with the community Glass-House WEdesign event series

Local authority leadership Engaging with community activists, connectors, and leaders to access ‘hard to reach’ groups in communities and networks Cross pollination workshops and unlocking collaborative economies

Figure 11.1 Co-design perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-14

194  Sophia de Sousa for instigating and supporting a collaborative approach to design and placemaking that ensures these processes create opportunities for empowerment and social value creation. The chapter demonstrates how this approach can help achieve selected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); specifically, SDGs 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, 10 Reduced inequalities, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, and 17 Partnership for the goals.

The public narrative and policy on community engagement in design and placemaking is evolving. Recently updated national planning policy guidance on community engagement and design states that: Communities can effectively shape both design policies and development through a collaborative process of meaningful participation. Early engagement and linking engagement activities to key stages of design decision-making and plan-making can empower people to inform the vision, design policies and the design of schemes. Engagement activities offer an opportunity to work collaboratively with communities to shape better places for local people. They consider how to embed empowerment, capacity building and employability opportunities for local people and organisations throughout the design process. (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2019) This update to planning policy guidance represents a significant shift in positioning community engagement as an opportunity for co-designing change and embedding social value, rather than seeing it simply as an obligation, or as an obstacle to overcome. However, while there is increasing interest and appetite for more collaborative placemaking, consultation and engagement processes still tend to position community stakeholders as commentators rather than as contributors and partners. There is still a significant gap in the infrastructure for collaboration to deliver on this objective for a more collaborative approach to design and placemaking. There are systemic changes required to support unearthing, valuing, and mobilising assets of all sorts that can contribute to creating successful places, and can establish processes that successfully integrate social value opportunities into the journey of change as well as the built outputs of design and placemaking. At The Glass-House, we define collaborative design in quite broad terms. It begins with identifying local needs and aspirations. Doing this relies on building an understanding of the local context in both physical and socio-economic terms. Only when there is that shared sense of both local challenges and opportunities can different voices and interests come together to develop a shared vision and brief, the foundation for any high-quality design process. And finally, collaborative design relies on creating

Co-designing collaborative economies  195 an inclusive, engaged, and transparent process for design ­decision-making which values and brings together a broad spectrum of expertise and assets (see Figure 11.2).

Local needs analysis Identify local needs and aspirations

A shared sense

Shared sense of local Build an understanding of challenges and the local context in opportunities physical and socioDifferent voices and economic terms interests come together to develop a shared vision and brief

Transparent process Create an inclusive, engaged and transparent process for design decision-making which values and brings together a broad spectrum of expertise and assets

Figure 11.2  Setting up a collaborative design process.

Great design brings together the principles of form, function, and feeling to create places that meet practical needs and that activate our senses and our feelings. Changing places should improve our experience of them, facilitate better social interaction, and create opportunities. Placemaking is all about creating social value, and great design recognises that the physical constructs are nothing if not linked to the people, organisations, and activities that will use and enliven them, and that this relationship should be interwoven throughout the design process. Co-design in placemaking is therefore a means of bringing people together for a journey of transformation to achieve social value.

Leaders and enablers: local authorities and clients The role of the local authority is absolutely crucial to enabling effective collaborative approaches and mechanisms for large-scale regeneration and development as well as the effective integration of smaller-scale and grass-roots initiatives. As the planning authority, it holds essential regulatory planning powers and is ideally positioned to champion place quality and equality, and to enable connections and collaborations across sectors and communities (see Chapter 13 for a detailed discussion on delivering social value of place through planning). Make no mistake about it; a decade of austerity has had an enormous impact on local government, which has suffered not only drastic cuts to budgets, but also a huge drain on inhouse skills and experience. However, austerity has also, very positively,

196  Sophia de Sousa forced local authorities to think differently, to explore alternative ways of working, and to embrace collaboration in order to deliver what in the past had been taken for granted as their remit. We do still expect a great deal of our local governments: to protect the interests and respond to the needs of citizens, to deliver manageable growth, and to be accountable. In so doing, we also place in them great trust and power. Here is where leadership and setting standards for quality and social value become crucial. While a local authority cannot fund everything (indeed they never could), they still have an enormous influence on who does what, and how it is done. They can help bring together diverse people and organisations to achieve shared goals, unlocking a collaborative economy that unearths and mobilises assets across sectors and disciplines. A collaborative economy approach is based on the sharing of knowledge, services, and goods with exchanges and interactions that are based on the principles of transparency, fairness, and good will. In simple terms, it is the idea of us all putting our tools on the table and exploring how we can put them together differently for mutual benefit and for the benefit of others. This might include organised schemes such as car or tool sharing, but can also describe informal relationships such as a grandparent picking a child up from school when the parents are at work, or an artist designing a menu for café in exchange for catering for the artist’s opening at a gallery. In the context of placemaking, we are interested in scaling up such interactions and alignments to extend the reach and impact of those collaborations within the community. The collaborative economy approach is interesting in placemaking terms because it recognises that there are a variety of ways to contribute and allows assets of different type, scale, and provenance to be valued, combined, and exchanged with greater freedom and ingenuity than the more financially driven marketplace permits. It can create new channels for sharing skills, pots of funding, and help to build networks of relationships. It can also match activities to empty physical spaces and help one space be shared and enlivened by multiple user groups. It creates a platform for people and organisations to come together around shared objectives and work together find a way to make things happen that they could not achieve on their own, with the ultimate objective of improving people’s quality of life. A simple example of this in the context of the role of a local authority could be to make an empty council-owned shop or building available for use by diverse user groups, and a collective of local people with different skills setting up a skills-share space offering a spectrum of support such as mending bikes, help with IT, tips on gardening, and so on. A collaborative economy approach to placemaking, therefore, increases the social value opportunities both through the process itself and through bringing changes to physical infrastructure into a joined-up conversation about how we mobilise our diverse assets for the collective good.

Co-designing collaborative economies  197 Construction clients have a similar pivotal role to play as leaders and enablers. They stand in a unique position to ensure that social value lies at the heart of their projects and is driven throughout briefing, design, procurement, construction, and eventual use and maintenance. In turn, this helps to raise awareness and buy-in throughout the wider supply chain, allowing social value to permeate. The South Yorkshire Housing Association case studies in Chapter 9 demonstrate successful approaches to this pivotal role. Local government can be that independent enabler that sits above personal or private agendas to protect and respond to the interests of the collective. Local government, in short, can be both the enabler and the glue for collaborative placemaking. It can champion and demand social value as a priority and condition for a role in shaping the local area, and it can help provide some of that crucial infrastructure for collaboration. To do this, local authorities must be willing to invite that collaboration in. Central Government policy now recommends it, and increasingly sets it as a criterion for funding. In July 2019, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government announced their £3.6 billion Towns Fund, which includes the £1 billion High Streets Fund. While the investment through these grant schemes is predominantly channelled into capital projects, this funding places a strong emphasis on partnership working and effective community engagement. This is just one example of an opportunity, here at a national scale, for local authorities to champion and enable a collaborative approach to co-designing place-based initiatives. For further information on the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, see https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-housingcommunities-and-local-government

The developer as a champion for quality and social value The development and construction industries also have an important role to play. As the delivery vehicle for a large percentage of the UK’s housing growth and urban regeneration, the impact of the decisions that each of these companies makes has a profound effect on civic life. With this comes huge responsibility alongside significant business opportunity (see Chapter 10 for a detailed discussion of Willmott Dixon’s approach to social value). Many companies are rising to the challenge of embedding social value and evaluating the social impact of their work. As well as making good business sense, through helping them to build both reputation and important local networks and partnerships, investing in social value has been recognised as a means of hitting their corporate social responsibility targets. There are ever more examples of local employment policies, to

198  Sophia de Sousa offer apprenticeships and to go beyond the minimum requirements of the Community Infrastructure Levy to support the development of valuable community infrastructure. For further information on the Community Infrastructure Levy, see https://www.gov.uk/guidance/community-infrastructure-levy However, these companies can do more to work with a wider spectrum of partners and collaborators, and to explore how to better integrate their projects with other local initiatives large and small. Moving away from the paternalistic approach of considering what the scheme can ‘give back’ to the community and instead considering how the scheme can better ‘work with the community’ can help companies tap into a local collaborative economy, both contributing to, and extracting assets from, other local initiatives. Creating opportunities for a different kind of early dialogue will help with this. Mapping local initiatives at a more granular scale will help developers better understand the local context and identify opportunities for partnership working throughout the design and build. This can help companies better respond to local needs and ensure the future life and success of the built outcomes. On very practical terms, it can also lay a much smoother path through the planning process.

Community collaborators and leaders Every community is bursting with community activists, connectors, and leaders. Whether involved in dedicated projects to shape places, or simply active in their daily pursuits, there is a broad spectrum of people with diverse skills and experience that could add value to individual development and regeneration schemes, or to neighbourhood or borough-level growth plans. Generally speaking, community-led initiatives operate at the fringes of, or around projects led by the public and private sectors. They often fill gaps in terms of providing activities and services for local people, and in responding to local needs and aspirations. They often both serve, and are driven by, the classically hard-to-reach groups that are so often absent from traditional consultation activities on large-scale public or private sector schemes. In short, they offer not only potential links to diverse audiences, but also the most current information on what the area needs, what is working, and what is not. Through a complex landscape of local networks, they also hold the most current information on what local people, groups, and organisations can offer. The trick therefore is to unearth and mobilise these assets, and to explore how, when aligned with public and private sector initiatives, all can cross-pollinate and enhance each other. In order to do this, we must apply a different kind of value

Co-designing collaborative economies  199 assessment to these assets, measuring them not only with the traditional metrics of power, influence, and financial clout, but also with their social value potential, both in their own right and when aligned with assets and initiatives from other sectors.

Examples of replicable co-design approaches from Glass-House Community Led Design practice The question, then, is how we facilitate bringing these different sectors, disciplines, and scales of placemaking initiatives together for mutual benefit, and above all, to generate greater social value for local people. The following examples apply some basic and easily replicable techniques used by The Glass-House Community Led Design (see https://theglasshouse.org.uk/), working with a range of partners, to support the dialogue, networking, and ideas generation required to enable a collaborative economy approach to placemaking. While we have been the convenors in these sessions, there is no reason why any sector could not take on this role. As we have already seen through our own practice, these are models that can be applied to a wide range of contexts. They help foster locally based dialogue to inform, co-design, or test local policies and strategies, as well as the visions and briefs of both individual and collective projects and schemes. Cross-sector ideas generation and co-designing local initiatives: Reconfiguring Place, a Glass-House WEdesign event series This event series sought to explore how we can change our relationship with the places around us, with a focus on improving design quality and creating more equitable places where communities thrive. The events brought together people of all ages, from teenagers through to octogenarians, members of the local community, design professionals, local authority officers, housing providers, students and academics, civic societies, and so on. Our audiences were self-selecting people who shared an interest for the themes being explored, representing a great range of voices and interests. All stepped into this space as equals, and as collaborators in shared tasks to explore complex themes that inform and influence how our places are shaped within the current landscape. All types of expertise, be it experiential, professional, or technical, were treated equally, and this was at the heart of empowering all participants as valued contributors to the dialogue and to generating propositions for change. It was a safe space in which people could share their reality with others, and better understand the perspectives of others. In this way, target 10.2: to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status, and target 10.3: to ensure equal opportunity

200  Sophia de Sousa and reduce inequalities of outcome by eliminating discriminatory practices and promoting appropriate action in this regard were achieved. Using the themes of connection, diversity, power, and sustainability as a starting point at each event, we focused on intergenerational cities in Glasgow, high streets in Blackpool, and housing in Manchester. Working collaboratively across the four themes, we used creative brainstorming and model-making to encourage participants to work together to think about new ideas and policy recommendations for our cities and spaces. At each event, participants were divided into four working groups to co-design ideas around one of the themes (connection, diversity, power, sustainability) to improve how we shape our places, and specifically how we shape our housing, our high streets, town centres, and how we create more intergenerational cities. Each group could take their ideas in a number of d irections, from practical ideas that could be implemented at a local level, such as repurposing an empty high street shop, to local or national policy recommendations, such as incentivising civic action through council tax rebates. We then asked each group to create a physical representation of their idea through simple modelling using arts and crafts materials that we provided. While these sessions were blue-sky thinking spaces, they were rooted very much in the ideas and assets that each group brought to the table and reflected the combination of people involved in each table’s discussion. It was interesting that regardless of which theme the tables began with, inevitably all of the tables ended up talking about shared values, and the things that are important to all of us in relation to the places around us, how we share them, how we interact within them, and the social value they should be creating. Each table challenged the status quo, and participants within each group challenged each other’s ideas, before coming together around one proposition that they would collectively champion. Through discussion and debate which grew from the diversity of voices represented at each table, participants found that they had more in common than not and pooled their collective knowledge, experience, and creativity around their propositions before presenting them to the other groups. Figure 11.3 shows examples of the ideas and policy recommendations that emerged from the Intergenerational Cities event in Glasgow (GlassHouse, 2020). These events were designed to test an approach to bringing people together to co-design placemaking initiatives by drawing on a diverse range of experience, skills, and assets. In a short time, each working group explored complex placebased issues and generated ideas for how to tackle them.

Co-designing collaborative economies  201

Figure 11.3 The four themes ‘at play’: connection, diversity, power, and sustainability, during The Glass-House Intergenerational Cities event in Glasgow.

Consistently across the events, the ideas brought together policy, practice, and the importance of cross-sector working, and experimented with simple and easily replicable approaches. What the participants appreciated most about the sessions was the opportunity for a dialogue and collaboration with a diverse mix of people, and that every idea was treated as valuable and worthy of exploration. Crucial to the success of the dialogue was the way traditional power structures were left at the door; every participant there was treated as an equal. As attendees put it:

202  Sophia de Sousa Everyone was included and had a voice. [What I valued most was] The generosity of ideas and respect shown between attendees.

Figure 11.4 Policy recommendations.

Laying the foundations for a collaborative economy: crosspollination workshops Cross-pollination is a practical approach to incubating networks of collaborative research, place-based projects, and innovation. The approach is based on the principle of creating a collaborative or sharing economy of assets (skills, projects, and resources) among different people and organisations, across disciplines and sectors.

Co-designing collaborative economies  203 The approach was created as part of an Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) funded research project ‘Scaling Up Co-design’ (2013/2014),1 which was a collaboration between academic partners: The Open University, Brunel University, Northumbria University, and Sheffield Hallam; civil society organisations: The Glass-House Community Led Design, Silent Cities, The Blackwood Foundation, and Fossbox and Flossie; and a freelance researcher Hannah Goraya. Cross-pollination has since been used by numerous organisations and for various purposes. AHRC included the approach as an impact case study in their report to Central Government (see Figure 11.5). Since being involved in the Scaling Up Co-design research project, The Glass-House has been applying and further developing the cross-pollination method in order to explore its potential to support collaborative economies within the context of placemaking. Fostering sectoral collaboration and alliances Following the research project, one of the early applications of crosspollination was in a Glass-House workshop framed within the context of housing provision in 2015. This workshop came at a time in which policy

Figure 11.5 Illustration of the impact of cross-pollination within the Scaling Up Co-design research project and its implications in terms of connecting and enabling partners and initiatives (Source: Courtesy of The Open University).

204  Sophia de Sousa changes had made a huge impact on social housing budgets and programmes, and many housing providers were feeling that they were not able to deliver their services as they would like. Bringing together organisations, that had often operated as competitors, to explore this cross-pollination approach quickly illustrated the opportunities that a collaborative economy approach offered. As one participant described it: Excellent, positive, engaging, energising were just some of the words used by participants to describe The Glass-House ‘Collaboration for Innovation in Place’ event. By 10 in the morning we were on our way back to the office after a whistlestop tour of projects in the pipeline from housing associations, housebuilders and researchers. No time to sit back and listen, we worked together to develop and promote the best projects, understanding and using our collective resources. Impressive, how quickly and effectively we all did it, from a standing (and fairly early) start. (Jane Briginshaw, Head of Design and Sustainability, Homes and Communities Agency) Unearthing and mobilising local assets On a very practical level, working within the context of a specific location, we have found cross-pollination an effective way to quickly unearth, connect, and mobilise resources, networks, and projects across specialisms and sectors within a community. In very simple terms, asking everyone in the room to share what they are doing, what they would like to do, what resources they have, and which ones they need, and creating an environment in which every participant, project, and resource is valued, are both empowering and can be extremely productive in a short space of time. In February 2019, we used cross-pollination within a Glass-House event, ‘Portobello Connects’, in collaboration with Architecture and Design Scotland, on the outskirts of Edinburgh. In this case, we asked local people and organisations to map their ideas, projects, and resources in the context of their local community. One of the most striking and useful learning outcomes from this event was the potential for cross-pollination to connect assets and projects of different scales within a larger conversation about the place and how it is working. We witnessed important connections being made, and the smaller initiatives being explored and valued alongside large-scale regeneration proposals. The activity also revealed that many of the participants had been unaware of many of the initiatives happening in the area, and the session served the useful purpose of both raising awareness and collectively building confidence in their neighbourhood and community, and what it had to offer (Figure 11.6).

Co-designing collaborative economies  205

Figure 11.6 Mapping local places, amenities, and initiatives in Portobello.

For Portobello Connects, we also began exploring how to use digital media to help support the dialogue and networking following the workshop, both among those attending, and in order to extend the reach of the conversation (see Figure 11.7). In November 2019, we applied the cross-pollination approach in Blackpool within the context of the Reconfiguring Place: High Streets event, and again, potential for unearthing a collaborative economy quickly and visibly emerged. We mapped and grouped just some of these connections to illustrate the approach, which we compiled in a small publication (Glass-House, 2021), that was then circulated among participants. This simple mapping exercise quickly illustrated the range of opportunities, but also the needs to help support further dialogue and move from a shared space for conversation to catalysing joint action. This is an area

Figure 11.7 Portobello connects map for community use.

206  Sophia de Sousa

Figure 11.8 The Glass-House ‘Reconfiguring place: high streets’ event, Blackpool.

of particular interest to us and through our strategic partnership with The Open University, we are exploring how to further develop models for infrastructure to support collaboration. Incubating civic leadership through cross-pollination More recently, within the context of social distancing restrictions linked to Covid-19, we have tested an online version of this crosspollination workshop as part of our action research project Incubating Civic Leadership, in partnership with The Open University and Knowle West Media Centre. For this workshop, we brought together representatives from the public, private, and community sectors from a community in London and one in Bristol, to explore both what was happening in their local areas, and the themes and initiatives they had in common. Through an online meeting space on Zoom, and using a Miro board as an online workspace, we could quickly and visually map what participants felt was needed in their area, the projects both underway and those participants were interested in initiating, and the assets each could contribute, or connect to, the various projects being explored (Figure 11.9). In a short space of time, common themes around empowering young people, activating green spaces, intergenerational activities and others emerged. When we moved to a conversation about choosing ideas to take forward as a pilot project through the research, interesting differences emerged, with one group focusing on a tangible physical improvement to the local high street, and the other focusing on the need to pilot a process to support incubating collaborative projects locally. These ideas reflected both the specific challenges and opportunities that the groups identified through the cross-pollination activity, and the assets at their disposal to act on them. This was an

Co-designing collaborative economies  207

Figure 11.9 Excerpt from cross-pollination workshop within the Incubating Civic Leadership research project.

important finding as it demonstrated that cross-pollination can lead to both collaborations around process and specific projects, and that it is responsive to both the specific local context and the people it involves. It also highlighted once more the need for infrastructure for collaboration that supports moving from ideas generation through to joint action.

Using co-design to explore global placemaking challenges The Covid-19 pandemic has brought a number of important questions around place quality, place equity, and the climate emergency to the placemaking agenda. What has been interesting about these themes is that while we have all seen them playing out locally, they have sparked global conversations and raised public awareness and interest in acting collaboratively to address them. The Glass-House 2020/2021 WEdesign event series Co-designing Sustainable Places brought people together to explore these themes, and to test the viability of creating co-design spaces online to work collaboratively on ideas to address these global challenges.

208  Sophia de Sousa Working in collaboration with tutors and students from University College London, The Glasgow School of Art, and The University of Sheffield, we held a series of online codesign events to explore our relationship with the universal elements air, earth, fire, and water. These were spaces to co-design ideas for how we could activate citizens to influence policy, practise, and play an active role in fighting our climate emergency and in working towards zero-carbon neighbourhoods. Using student work as a springboard for ideas generation, participants worked together in small groups to co-design engagement activities that could raise awareness, empower people as champions, and activate change. Like every other Glass-House event series, these events attracted a range of people representing different communities, sectors, and disciplines. However, the online space created new opportunities in terms of reach and access, and we were joined by people from around the UK as well as from far-flung places such as Australia, Canada, China, Chile, and others. These were all people with a passion for tackling our climate emergency, bringing a huge array of experience and expertise to the conversation. This allowed us to focus both on specific local contexts, such as the area around London Road in Sheffield, and on universal themes around access to water, energy consumption, food wastage, and so on. Using the online collaborative design tool Miro, we created a shared space for ideas generation and for collaging, using words and imagery to represent the emerging ideas. To ensure that those who felt less confident with the technology could play an active role in the conversation, our student facilitators brought together the digitals tools we were using, combining the online design platform with the video conferencing tools offered in Zoom, in such a way that each participant had a variety of ways in which they could contribute. Aided by our student facilitators, our participants worked together to formulate policy recommendations, ways to raise awareness and instigate behaviour change, and practical projects and programmes that could be applied in a variety of contexts. One such example was a project concept for working with local restaurants and takeaways around waste management, recycling, composting, and the role they could play in a local food growing economy. It was a simple idea to create a locally based but easily replicable programme that would make it easy for restaurants to improve their own carbon footprint, to connect into other local initiatives, and to raise awareness among their customer base. It was a simple yet powerful example of the potential in creating an infrastructure for co- design and collaboration, and in unlocking a collaborative economy approach to shaping places not only through the existing and evolving physical infrastructure, but also through the communities and activities that bring them to life.

Co-designing collaborative economies  209

Figure 11.10 Collage from The Glass-House event harnessing the elements: towards Zero-carbon neighbourhoods.

Another idea that emerged was a project to link the heritage of a city’s waterways to local people’s memories and stories as a starting point for a conversation about how we use, manage, and interact with water in the future. This was about starting with the historic relationship between water and human settlements and recognising that our relationship with water has changed and evolved over time. It was also about looking forward in the context of a climate emergency and exploring how we can create a more respectful relationship with, and more equitable access to, this essential resource. It touched on flood alleviation; resourcing local life and nature; creating activities and amenities for locals and tourists; understanding and celebrating our heritage; as well as many other aspects of placemaking. Bringing a collaborative economy approach to design and placemaking offers great opportunity. It can unearth and mobilise a broad range of assets across disciplines and sectors and can both draw on existing practice and innovate. It can be facilitated by simple methods of gathering people and organisations to explore what they have, what they need, and what is possible. The snapshots from Glass-House practice have illustrated examples of simple face-to-face activities that can help do this, as well as some of the digital online techniques emerging within the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.

210  Sophia de Sousa All of the examples illustrate the power of bringing diverse people together through creative co-design activities, and the range of outcomes from such spaces. In each example, it was the diversity of participants that made the spaces enjoyable for those taking part, created the opportunity for peerto-peer learning, and brought together the range of experience, expertise, and creativity to fuel really productive co-design sessions in relatively short spaces of time. They were all quite simple activities but required facilitation and enablers to create a safe space in which all were welcomed and valued. In the case of these examples, we created the infrastructure for collaboration, and, as suggested earlier, there is no reason why any sector could not convene and facilitate such spaces. Whether through face-to-face, or online opportunities to mobilise such conversations and collaboration, some basic principles remain essential to unlocking meaningful empowerment and social value opportunities. Above all, it is important to invite everyone into a neutral space as equals, and to put aside traditional power structures, valuing every asset, every idea, and every initiative put onto the table as worthy of respect, consideration, and exploration. It also requires each participant, each organisation, and each sector present to ask the simple question: What can we achieve together that I could not achieve alone? Such spaces must also be fertile ground for pushing boundaries and exploring new ways of doing things. Instead of saying something won’t work because the current systems and practices make it impossible, this space must encourage participants to ask: What would make it possible and how could I, and my organisation, contribute to achieving it? Above all, these spaces should create a space for people of diverse social, cultural, and economic groups, of different ages and orientations, to come together and better understand each other’s needs and aspirations, and to identify shared values and objectives as their foundation for shaping their environment. Placemaking serves a civic purpose and can unlock social value for many if its design is inclusive, empowering, and above all, collaborative.

Social value and community heritage – Andrew Langley Focusing on the community of Caribbean descent in Nottingham, the ‘Perceptions of Heritage’ project used ideas of community heritage to enhance connections to the built environment. During a series of workshops, participants were encouraged to draw and write about activities they considered significant to

Co-designing collaborative economies  211 their culture. These drawings and memories were displayed during a public exhibition, allowing conversations to continue into the broader community. Discussion of heritage and value creation within the built environment is currently dominated by monumentally grand and aesthetic sites and places (Arizpe, 2000; Cleere, 2001; Meskell, 2002). This project aimed to challenge what Smith (2006) describes as the Authorised Heritage Discourse by focusing on intangible heritage, which is ‘deeply rooted’ within communities and attached to the local geography that they live in (Cominelli and Greffe, 2012). Consequently, the community within Nottingham was placed at the heart of the project. During the multiple workshops and exhibitions, conversations between the participants initially revolved around the co-created drawings of activities. Conversations then developed to focus on memories of the spaces and places in which these activities took place. The shared memories of activities and community involvement within the spaces helped to further connect people to place. Working collaboratively with the community over the two and a half years, social value was created as the process enhanced a sense of ‘integration, contribution and belonging to normal society’ (after Raiden et al., 2019). The study revealed that sharing community memories and encouraging conversations in the form of participatory exhibitions contribute to developing a place identity from the bottom-up. The project highlighted the potential of this method to understand the intangible heritage of any community and to create social value within the existing built environment. It also revealed the potential of this understanding to be applied within the design phase of new build projects – for example, placemaking from the bottom-up for areas that are undergoing regeneration. The discussion and case examples in this chapter relate to a wide range of SDGs and targets, including SDG 6 Clean water and sanitation, targets 6.1, to achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all; and 6.b, to support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management; SDG 7 Affordable and clean energy, target 7.1, to ensure universal access to affordable, reliable, and modern energy services; SDG 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, target 9.1, to develop quality, reliable, sustainable, and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all; 9.2, to promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation; SDG 10 Reduced inequalities, targets 10.2, to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status; and 10.3, to ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies, and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies, and action in this regard;

212  Sophia de Sousa SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communities, targets 11.3, to enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries; and 11.4, to strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage; SDG 12 Responsible consumption and production, targets 12.2, to achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources; 12.3, to halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains; 12.5, to substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling, and reuse; and, 12.8, to ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature; SDG 13 Climate action, target 13.3, to improve education, awareness-raising, and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction, and early warning; SDG 16 Peace, justice, and strong institutions, target 16.7, to ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels; and, SDG 17 Partnership for the goals, target 17.17, to encourage and promote effective public, public-private, and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.

Chapter summary Co-design offers a broad spectrum of opportunities in placemaking, and the potential to unearth and mobilise assets across sectors and disciplines. This can support a more holistic approach to design and placemaking, rooted in the local context, and bring together the design of physical places and spaces with the design of activities, services, and the rich social, economic, and cultural networks that help places thrive. Bringing co-design together with a collaborative economy approach can help create the infrastructure for that collaboration that can activate citizens, local businesses, voluntary sector groups, and other local stakeholders as partners rather than just commentors. It can help bring together and integrate small, organic, community-led placemaking initiatives with large-scale development and regeneration. In simple terms, it can help us all pool our resources on shared objectives and socially driven values. We all have a role to play in this, starting with an appreciation for what each sector, and indeed each person, can contribute, and finding new ways to bring our collective assets together for common good. Social value is implicit in the intentions of placemaking and working together to build a

Co-designing collaborative economies 213 locally appropriate infrastructure for collaboration, which invites in and values different types of expertise, experience, and social capital, can help us better integrate social value opportunities into the process, not just the built outcomes of design and development. Infrastructure for collaboration starts with a conversation in a safe space where differences can be acknowledged and explored, but where the focus is on identifying common values and objectives and on working together to create and respond to opportunities as well as local issues. Any sector can drive forward this agenda, and local authorities have a particularly important role to play as a champion, protector, and enabler of public benefit and shared assets. However, it is a shared responsibility for us all to create those spaces for co-design, cross-pollination, and collaboration and this starts simply with reaching out and starting a conversation as equals about how we can work together to bring social value into the co-design of our places and communities.

Note 1 The cross-pollination research was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council through the Scaling Up Co-design project (AH/K006711/1) and by Research England through the HEIF Incubating Civic Leadership project.

References Arizpe, L. (2000) Cultural heritage and globalization, In Avrami, E., Mason, R. and de la Torre, M. (Eds.) Values and heritage conservation, Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute, 32–38. Cleere, H. (2001) The uneasy bedfellows: Universality and cultural heritage, In Layton, R., Stone, P.G. and Thomas, J. (Eds.) Destruction and conservation of cultural property, London: Routledge, 22–29. Cominelli, F. and Greffe, X. (2012) Intangible cultural heritage: Safeguarding for creativity, City, Culture and Society Journal, 3, 245–250. Glass-House (2020) Reconfiguring place: Voices of the glass-house 2019/20 event series, London: The Glass-House Community Led Design, https://theglasshouse. org.uk/resources/we-design-voices-of-the-glass-house-debate-series-2019-20/ [accessed 3 May 2021]. Glass-House (2021) Cross-pollination stories: A snapshot from Blackpool, London: The Glass-House Community Led Design, https://theglasshouse.org.uk/resources/cross-pollination-stories-blackpool/ [accessed 3 May 2021]. Meskell, L. (2002) The intersections of identity and politics in archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 31, 279–301. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (2019) Guidance design process and tools, Effective community engagement on design: How can local communities be effectively engaged in the design of their area? https://www.gov. uk/guidance/design#effective-community-engagement-on-design [accessed 14 May 2020]. Raiden, A.B., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (2019) Social value in construction, Abingdon: Taylor and Francis, ISBN: 978-1-138-29509-4 Smith, L. (2006) Uses of Heritage, Abingdon: Routledge, ISBN: 978-0-415-31831-0

12 Architecture and social value Praxis, strategy, and tactics Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett

In this chapter, we highlight some of the opportunities for considering, creating, and delivering social value within the architectural profession (its praxis). We also show how the agency architects have over their design process can be utilised to influence the design and coordination of a project team to collectively achieve social value. We set out examples of how we have utilised strategy and different operational approaches and tactics in creating and delivering social value. We discuss collaborative and agile strategies that we have

•

•

Creatingsocial and physical infrastructure that provides access to the services and support to alleviate economic, fuel and food poverty Establishing community led not-for-profit organisations and facilitating access to services, advice, and skills

• • •

Improving skills development Offering a diverse range of learning experiences Awareness of and access to lifelong learning

• •

Working directly with local people Reimagining and re-creating social, environmental, and economic infrastructure

• • • • •

Ideals and systems of localism Choice of materials & construction methods Re-use and reduce waste Recycling Energy efficiency

Figure 12.1 Architecture, social value, and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-15

Architecture and social value  215 learnt and applied from the periphery of architectural practice, drawing on good practice from software design, user experience, and creative industries. We also demonstrate how the strategies, allied to acting and choosing tactically, can help achieve many Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including 1 No poverty, 4 Quality education, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, and 13 Climate action.

Reflective praxis, procurement, and systemic considerations for social value As a profession, architects are challenged to consider and establish a role in advocating for social value to be an important consideration when conceiving, procuring, and completing architecture. In this context, the architectural practice, its praxis, is to provide individuals and communities with the opportunities and resources to thrive in a sustained, productive, and regenerative way. This is the predominate means to increase social value through architecture. Throughout the procurement process, architects have learnt to consider social value through the way they work, the choices they make, and the formal relations they form within a project. In this way, architecture can be seen as a tool for increasing individual and collective well-being and reducing inequality. Understanding how architects can utilise strategy and tactics to create social value, as well as integrating legislation and guidance to realise social value gains, has been a particular point of interest for our practices: Studio Loafalo in Central Finland and Baxendale, in North-West England in the UK. Knowing, in a nuanced way, when and how social value is considered, created, and delivered within the complex design and construction environment is central to our work. Equally, establishing a demand for architecture as a process, service, and a product that ultimately offers tangible benefits to a broad range of stakeholders is part of our contemporary reflective praxis. Being reflexive in our praxis is important as it challenges us to consider the how of architecture. Our experience and perspectives on social value in architecture are illustrated in this chapter. The ordinary, legislation, and championing social value It is the ordinary where architecture can achieve the most significant impact on social value, although there may be a tendency to view architecture in terms of the visual, a nonpareil lifestyle or a spectacle (for example, Grand Designs or the Guggenheim). Architecture is really about the capacity to inf luence and shape ideas prior to any built form. Integrating ever-evolving legislative requirements into project designs, for example, in terms of energy efficiency, is one important mechanism that architectural practice can employ to create and deliver social value. Moreover, by looking at and learning about new legislation, then being

216  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett able to knit together different strands of legislation and regulations, understanding the resulting potential impact on society, and articulating this to different project stakeholders, is an important role that an architect can fulfil. There is a systemic shift in considering the multiple facets of the global climate emergency, aligned with the SDGs, whereby life cycle assessments (LCAs) need to include environmental, social, and economic assessments as well as the embodied and in-use energy efficiency of the built environment. Architectural practice can provide the practical means to enable the achievement of the SDGs in a way that offers a coherent approach to balancing the often competing, or conf licting, requirements to maximise economic value for money, aesthetic impact, cost-effective and functional solutions, and sustainable design and practice. In Europe, the European Union (EU) legislation CEN/TC 350 offers one intriguing opportunity for embedding social value in architectural projects. At its core, the framework sets out the ability to assess and compare the impact of social aspects of buildings and architecture against an environmental LCA and economic assessment of the functional requirements of buildings as set by a client’s brief (for further detail, see CEN, 2021). This is congruent with the move to a zero-carbon industry. The CEN/TC 350 legislation is likely to be regulated into force by 2025–2030. It comes after the implementation of life cycle costing (LCC) and LCA, and the Whole Life Carbon vision (see World Green Building Council, 2016). This legislative framework provides an opportunity for architects to facilitate the early assessment of social value propositions to strengthen the considerations of social value. Architects can utilise their role and core skill set to promote and communicate the results of such assessments, and so champion social value. Many other initiatives have been ‘overlaid’ onto the practice of architecture, including green overlays (Gething, 2011) and embedding BIM integration into the design process to drive efficiencies and coordination in production, procurement, and construction of buildings. Such technical exercises offer some opportunities for social value discussions through assessment measures such as BREEAM (BRE, 2021), LEED (U.S. Green Building Council, 2021), BEAM plus (Hong Kong Green Building Council, 2021), and WELL building standard (International WELL Building Institute, 2021). Collaboration in professional practice to achieve social value Engendering collaboration is the other important opportunity architects have in considering, creating, and delivering social value in projects. The feasibility of an architectural project to generate collaboration and social value is often dependent on who is paying for the architecture and their motivation for

Architecture and social value  217 procuring it. This requires reflection, evolution, and a reconsideration of the architectural practice as process, output, and impact, rather than practice as a studio or a defined organisational entity (see Chapter 2 for a discussion about the challenges and issues related to participation and community engagement). There is a long history of socially engaged practice and projects peripheral to the mainstream, and over the last ten years, we have witnessed the emergence of a range of socially engaged, clustered, multi-disciplinary, and collaborative ways of conceiving, developing, and delivering architecture that are disrupting the profession in the mainstream, including: • •

•

• •

Assembles’ (2013) Granby Four Streets project, an ongoing communityled project to rebuild Granby, a Liverpool neighbourhood Fjord studio’s (2021) service design of Kenyan markets, a project which designed a new platform to connect local workers and customers, and defined the operational framework that equipped the local team with tools and processes to continue the design work on their own Cardiff Grange Pavilion 2012–2020 project (Cardiff University, 2020), a community-led partnership initiative, to redevelop the former derelict bowls pavilion into a high-quality community hub, cafe, and gardens with increased space and improved accessibility Spatial Agency (Awan et al., 2011), a project that presents a new way of looking at how buildings and space can be produced, moving away from architecture’s traditional focus on the look and making of buildings Live Projects’ within many Architectural Schools that seek to educate students in collaborative forms of practice.

All these projects and countless other community-led architectural projects manifest through an acknowledgement of a need for reinvention of architecture to ensure that it remains an effective and relevant professional practice. Questioning the motivation behind every act of work and production and presenting alternative actions that increase collective well-being has been an important aim of our praxis for studio Loafalo in Finland and Baxendale in the UK. Our work has been conceived as an experiment to occupy spaces and opportunities different to those found within traditional architectural practice. For example, we find inspiration in the way in which artists and arts communities go about their work, in addition to looking to business models and innovative software companies for ideas. Our practices are a means of advocating for individual and collective behavioural change in the community, within different institutional, governmental, and academic contexts. We follow the Co-Create ecosystem model of collaboration. This is a project partnership model characterised by flat organisation structures and open collaboration, where anybody can propose problems, offer solutions, and decide which solutions to use as shown in Figure 12.2. We advocate for this kind of dynamic and agile approach as it has

218  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett Open

Collaboration

Co-Create Platforms

Co-Create Ecosystems

Platform where a projects can post a problem, anyone can propose solutions and the community chooses the solutions

Ecosystems where anybody can propose

Co-Create Ecosystem

Co-Create Platform

Organisation

Specisalist Services

High Social Value Projects Collaboration in Social Value

Hierarchical

Specialist Services

solutions and decide which solutions to use

Traditional Projects

Flat

Organisation Specialist Teams Specialist Teams

Specialist services chosen by a project

A private teams of specialists that jointly select problems and decide how to conduct work and choose solutions

the problem and picks the solutions Closed

Collaboration

Figure 12.2 Organisation and collaboration for social value.

facilitated the greatest potential for multi-stakeholder collaborations and social value propositions in our experience. The other approaches offer opportunities for closer control. For example, choosing a hierarchical, Specialist services model means that an architect has control over the direction of innovation and they can clearly define how to consider, create, and deliver social value. This is useful for projects that have a strict and well-defined procurement route with short timescales. A flatter-structured Specialist Team may share the burden of innovation, but this trades decisiveness. This approach may be appropriate for larger projects when timescales are less defined and/or possibilities for social value are at a broader scale. Equally, the Specialist Team model will suit very smallscale projects, for example, self-build community endeavours. Within the open collaboration praxis, both the Co-Create Platform and Co-Create Ecosystem models enable greater multi-stakeholder involvement. The Co-Create Platform allows for understanding of social value from user perspectives whilst retaining control over project management. This is ideal for maximum reach on educational and community projects. The Co-Create Ecosystem approach enables processes, strategies, and roles that spearhead concerted collaboration with shared goals. This model is particularly suitable for residential and community projects that rely on sustained and coordinated involvement. Utilising a practice of co-creation, which is flat and open in structure, supports research and development cultures within architectural practice.

Architecture and social value  219 It creates space for experimenting, testing, and prototyping to develop new ideas; and establishes long-term collaborative relationships between academia, local government, and commercial practices. We have found that adopting this model of practice has helped us to identify opportunities for social value at every stage of the procurement of architecture, and the RIBA Plan of Works (RIBA, 2020) has enabled us to adopt alternative roles within the process of producing architecture. Such practice demonstrates change towards achieving SDGs 11, 13, and 17. First, by setting up practices that work directly with local people, we provide opportunities for ownership and support for reimagining and re-creating the social, environmental, and economic infrastructure that is necessary for supporting and improving the lives of local people (SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communities). Second, integrating environmental measures within architecture enhances the ability to meet SDG 13 on Climate action. And finally, engaging and working with environmental frameworks helps develop and enhance policy coherence for sustainable development and sharing knowledge and expertise (SDG 17 Partnerships for the goals). For further information, see Cen/TC 350 Legislation: EN 15643-3 Sustainability of construction works – Assessment of buildings – Part 3 Framework for the assessment of social performance EN 15643-4 Sustainability of construction works – Assessment of buildings – Part 4 Framework for the assessment of economic performance EN 16309 Sustainability of construction works – Assessment of social performance of buildings – Methods Climate action: https://www.architectsdeclare.com/ Participation: Blundell Jones, P., Petrescu, D. and Till, J. (Eds.) (2005) Architecture and participation, Abingdon: Routledge.

Thinking and working strategically in architecture for creating social value Strategically thinking and working in architecture to create and deliver social value requires a combination of leaders and participants who steer the agenda as well as a common framework to guide action. A key role for an architect within a project is to illustrate and communicate a consistent and effective framework for engagement. Many architectural studios have their own bespoke strategies built up over experience and time, which are themselves often adapted from the educational studios whence their protagonists graduated. Over the last ten years, we have trialled different strategies for engagement and social value creation, including active design participatory methods, peer-led models, and co-evolutionary practices. Many of our projects have embedded and developed social value throughout the life cycle of the architectural project, in its conception to its construction, and have seen this as an ‘active enabler’ to the progression of the project, be it ideation at

220  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett beginning, or problem solving at the end. (See Chapter 11 on collaborative/ participatory design for further discussion.) Participation strategies go some way to shift the perception of architecture from merely the creation of drawings for buildings, to more successful intervention and action that facilitate a successful building of projects. Visualising and articulating social value are a key part of the architect’s role in the participatory project, opening up strategies and frameworks for all and then successfully guiding their use. Strategies for architecture traditionally come in the form of ‘plans of work’ or client briefs or planning constraints, which seek to prescribe or define the performance of a building and its activities in definitive terms to enable time, cost, and quality metrics to be ascertained. This is the typical procurement route; predictive, iterative, or incremental approaches to strategy are common. The aforementioned life cycle analysis (LCA) enables trade-offs between the competing environmental, economic, and social assessments. An alternative, agile approach is specifically aimed at creating value propositions which embed social value and that are tested and designed until correct, are dynamic, and include an expressed goal of the user. Agile is actually about creating a mindset, utilising a framework to work together, and creating the conditions and the environment to enable such work to take place. Specific ‘agile strategies’ that we have employed in our practices include: • • •

Emergent leadership: knowing when to step up to a task Active silence: knowing when to listen Sprint-ability: knowing when to change gears, work fast, solve problems.

Choosing to use agile strategies to consider, create, and deliver social value can help embed it within the negotiation of the traditional three pillars of time, cost and quality, or indeed wider value-based criteria used in the procurement process. Where more traditional plans of work seek to fix, or ‘sign-off’, functionality (the brief), then the costs (the budget), and then the time (the programme), agile strategies that we have used necessitate a more dynamic approach to functionality and time. Social value relies on costs being fixed in different stages of a project, and then enabling time and functionality as variables that allow social value to be built incrementally. This strategy calls for ‘slow architecture’. We showcase two case examples of social value being built slowly: The Institute for Bio-Economy in Finland, and Preston – Our Heritage in 2032 in the UK. Institute for Bio-Economy, Finland We used agile strategies in the masterplan and development of the Institute for Bio-Economy in Central Finland (Figure 12.3). This project involved us working with a diverse range of stakeholders, including local authorities, educational organisations (13–18-year-old education, 18+ vocational

Architecture and social value  221

Figure 12.3 Overall Concept vision for the Institute of Bio-Economy.

degree level education, and adult learning), entrepreneurial incubators, agricultural industries, and local and national European funding bodies. The project centred around the development of a new masterplan for education, business, tourism, and industry within a sparsely populated rural community, Tarvaala, located in central Finland. Starting with a co-evolutionary network mapping of every value proposition, all stakeholders participated in discussions and workshops with the future sector of bioeconomy in mind. Engaging a diverse range of partners who brought different voices to the project enabled a number of initiatives to emerge that were not originally conceived within the project inception. Using a dynamic approach to teamwork during the successive workshops and events, the project developed campus level, building, and room scales concurrently (see Figure 12.4). Within the overall masterplan, teams were split to run specific activities and prototype new learning environments, material specifications, and digital user interactions (see Figure 12.5) that were then worked into building designs and costings. The architect’s role in the project was varied, including design, and drawing work, graphic design, community engagement, fund raising, coordinating and supervision, landscape design, and events planning. We led the development of circular business initiatives on site, including: • • •

Waste streams feeding energy production from the rural agricultural industry into new locally developed biogas refineries on site Communal eco CO2 capturing greenhouses for local food production Enterprise zones for start-up companies in the local area

NATURE

T

PA C

IM

ST IN

TE

G

NEEDS

DEPLOYMENT

THINKING

VALUES

MASTERPLAN Living Lab Approach

2

4

1

6

6

10 8

5

3

6

7

9

Figure 12.4 Dynamic approach to including social value propositions overlaid to masterplan design. Left: Co-created Values. Middle: Masterplan, in built form. Right: Development parcels in ‘slow architectural development’.

ACTION

ENTERPRISE

222  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett

Architecture and social value  223

Figure 12.5 The Institute of Bio-Economy at the level of room scale.

• •

Digital infrastructure New sports and recreational facilities, and accommodation, to improve nature tourism within the area

For further discussion on circular business models, see Chapter 7. The project was conceived to respond to the emerging potential for creating and delivering social value in Tarvaala, specifically by way of education, training, and employment opportunities within the umbrella of the bioeconomy. The local community wanted to reflect their commitment to the environment and at the same time use the project to provide social initiatives that enhance longer-term development in the region. For further information, see https://biotalouskampus.fi/en/ Table 12.1 Project summary: Institute for Bio-Economy Enablers & inputs

Key methodologies

Outputs

Core skills of the architect: Architecture, graphic design, community engagement, fund raising, volunteer coordinator and supervisor, landscape design, events planning Community: Commitment to the environment and longterm development of the region Funding: EU Social Development funds, EU Regional Development funds, Keski-Suomi Partnership Poke, Jamk

Development of circular State of the art business initiatives, such community as waste streams feeding facilities for energy production from the education, rural agricultural industry training, work, into new locally developed and recreation biogas refineries on site, Establishment of Inclusion of communal eco co2 a bioeconomic capturing greenhouses for strategy for local food production, central Finland Development of enterprise Social and zones for start-up companies economic plans in the local area for education, Digital infrastructure training, work Creation of a new sports and programmes, recreational facilities, and and regional accommodation, to improve tourism nature tourism within the area initiatives

224  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett Preston – our heritage in 2032, UK Discussing future notions of social value in construction, building and conservation can help bring together diverse sectors to benefit the local area. Social value is then woven into dialogues about built heritage. When Preston local council engaged with schools and the activities of Preston Guild (a historic organisation of traders, craftsmen, and merchants), we used this as an opportunity to broaden the architectural conversation on heritage. We explored how to collectively define future social value in built form that would complement and add to the city’s existing heritage and conservation. The project was funded by a Heritage Lottery Fund grant and we worked with a peer-led agile strategy whereby five local schools engaged with a group of professional architects and students of architecture in Preston. The aim was to co-create a common understanding of social value from the perspective of under 25-year-old inhabitants and to use this understanding to inform future professional choices, planning decisions, and career options for the residents of Preston. A series of workshops, public forums, discussions, exhibitions, and prototyping of built architectural heritage pavilions were coordinated entirely by the students. They imagined what a common heritage would look like in 2032, visualised this architecturally, and then scanned back to the present day to establish what initiatives were needed to enable this future vision to be made real. Students created pamphlet visualisations, prototype installations, and pavilions to convey their visions of social value and raise the wider community’s awareness of the Guild such that it could be knitted into the development of the city of Preston (see Figures 12.6 and 12.7). The project provided local schools and their communities an opportunity to learn about their heritage, social value in architecture, and the city around them in a longitudinal way. It gave the participants an opportunity to celebrate what they had learnt about their heritage and consider how the heritage of Preston could influence its future development through creative work. Importantly, the project also helped develop confidence within the community to discuss heritage, social value, and the built environment with professionals from that sector. In turn, it encouraged architectural professionals to consider the heritage and social value of the city, its inhabitants, and the future design proposals in a new light. The two case studies presented focus on developing an understanding of the praxis and strategies in architecture that add value to considering, creating, and delivering social value in the built environment. Centring on the core skills of the architect is important, as is focusing on the strategies that enable social value to emerge out of the process, with a strong emphasis on highlighting in a consistent, structured, and illustrated framework how to work between, and within, the plan of work stages.

Figure 12.6 School and college posters visioning our heritage in Preston in 2032.

Architecture and social value  225

226  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett

Figure 12.7  Prototyping and Exhibiting of Our Heritage 2032.

The projects demonstrate how a range of SDGs (1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12) can be addressed. Both projects are situated within areas that have intense unemployment and underemployment challenges, and pressures to create employment, training, and entrepreneurial opportunities. Important priorities for creating and delivering social value thus focus on improving skills development, the offer of a diverse range of learning experiences for people (particularly youth), attainment, and employment prospects (SDG 4 Quality education, target 4.4, SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth, targets 8.5 and 8.6). It also provides the ability to offer access to services and advice (SDG 1 No poverty, target 1.4), which all collectively help reduce poverty at the local level. Creating the infrastructure that encourages and supports a reconnection to the city and its heritage in Preston, and the agricultural roots of Tarvaala, also helps support and develop a more general sense of well-being (SDG 3 Good health and well-being). Furthermore, at the heart of the two projects was the objective to enable a social infrastructure of knowledge and understanding of local place to inform and guide the development of the projects. With regard to the Institute for Bio-Economy, this meant developing future industry initiatives in the form of start-up spaces and circular business practices to turn waste streams into viable products (SDG 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, targets 9.1 and 9.3). By working directly with local people to provide the skills and support to interpret and achieve social value, a longer-term and sustainable community is formed with closer economic and social ties to both local place and the environment (11 Sustainable cities and communities, ­target 11.3).

Architecture and social value  227 Table 12.2 Project summary: Preston – Our Heritage in 2032 Enablers & inputs

Key methodologies

Outputs & outcomes

Core skills of the architect: Use of agile Bespoke resource packs for Architectural frameworks and schools that enable them education, graphic service design to continue to consider design, community The development of heritage, social value, and engagement, project peer led pedagogy the built environment to management, building, The development of support teaching within workshop instruction, future casting social the core curriculum fund raising, volunteer value and heritage after the project was coordinator and from perspectives of completed supervisor, events youth communities Learning about heritage planning and celebrating the Funding: learning Heritage Lottery Fund, Confidence in communitylocal schools funding, architect engagement UCLan innovation The means for a more funds engaged community

Ultimately, these two projects deliver local infrastructure in the form of new approaches to public space and new values assigned to physical heritage as future social value. Importantly, this encourages responsible and responsive consumption (12 Responsible consumption and production, target 12.8).

Acting and choosing tactically in architecture to deliver social value One area that has an immediate impact on social value in the built environment is the choices and decisions that architects make with materials and design proposals, what we refer to as the tactics for architects. For our practices, these tactical decisions are derived from our overall praxis, and the strategy for delivery we have developed with a community or a project. Our practices interpret tactical material choices running along two intertwined, but discrete perspectives: •

‘Choosing of materials’ in terms of the physical materials that can be chosen to embody and evidence social value within a specific community. For example, the role of the architect is to consider and specify material choices that are environmentally sound, and/or made locally to encourage skills development, convey historical or social signification for a community.

228  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett •

‘Framing of material choices’ that are seen as ‘concrete’ specific interventions in design that make a material difference to the project and enable social value to be enhanced. For example, the layout of the design of a building to enhance well-being (see Chapter 9 for further discussion on this), specific decisions to incorporate enhanced aspects of the brief without cost to the project, or the decision to choose specific roles and procurement routes to complete the project.

Both of these perspectives, the ‘choosing of materials’ and the ‘framing of material choices’, are incredibly important for considering, creating, and delivering social value within projects. Below are two examples that illustrate these intertwined perspectives on their own terms: Love Milton, and The Portland Inn – Raising the Roof, both in the UK. LoveMilton, Colston Milton, UK Baxendale studio was initially engaged by the local Church of Scotland (parish of Colston Milton) to explore the feasibility of designing and delivering a community self-build project to establish a new community centre and place of worship (Figure 12.8). The majority of use within existing church-owned facilities

Figure 12.8 LoveMilton concept vision, and phase 1 construction.

Architecture and social value  229

Figure 12.9 LoveMilton, Prototyping, and experimentation in Design.

was non-religious and so the opportunity for creating a new community-led and owned organisation that could deliver and take ownership of the building and then rent space back to the church was investigated and established. The other aim of creating a local community organisation required starting a process of testing and prototyping community self-build activity at an incremental and small scale focused on building, establishing, and creating the capacity to deliver and manage projects of much greater complexity. The role of the architect in this process has been organic, agile, and not always within the normal description of architectural practice, or even architecture at all (Figure 12.9). This was a project about finding the gaps, being situated, present and engaged with a specific situation and finding the best position, within that situation, to create social value and have a progressive and sustained impact on people and place. The project outputs included the design and planning permission for a new community centre and place of workshop; construction of an outdoor classroom, a community pizza oven, a community garden, a memorial garden, and a community orchard. It also included the internal renovation of existing office premises to create a new base for the LoveMilton organisation; construction of a recycling point, establishment of a can recycling scheme; delivery of an employability training programme with The Princes Trust, and screen-printing workshops. Over 100 local people returned to education or employment through our activities and initiatives (Table 12.3). The Portland Inn – raising the roof, Stoke-on-Trent, UK Baxendale was invited by artists and residents of the Portland Street area of Hanley (Stoke-on-Trent) to design and deliver a temporary community self-build project that would permit a summer programme of social and arts events for local residents on a contested urban green space (Figure 12.10). The space was situated opposite the Portland Inn, a semi-derelict pub that

230  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett had been compulsory purchased by the council due to excessive instances of anti-social behaviour, drug problems, and prostitution. As a result, it was avoided and neglected by other members of the community. The previous summer, our clients had started a process of utilising the building to deliver social and cultural activities, but the poor condition prohibited its use for anything other than storage. The Portland Inn Project had formerly used a marquee on the green space to deliver some activities, but this needed to be dropped at the end of each day and then erected again the following morning. It also offered poor visibility of the adjacent areas and was vulnerable to vandalism. We were asked to design a structure that could be established on the site for a six-week period that could resist potential vandalism, be robust and which could also be built with local people as an engagement tool and capacity-building exercise. The Portland Inn Project was gifted a 40ft shipping container, which they decided to employ as a semi-permanent small-scale community centre on the green space until they raised funds, acquired ownership, and gained the permissions required to renovate the Portland Inn as a community arts centre. We designed a methodology for adapting the container for use as a community resource and worked with a local fabricator to install and adapt it on site. A temporary pavilion was constructed out of reclaimed scaffolding and corrugated metal cladding and was shortlisted for the RIBAJ McEwan Award for Architecture with a social impact. Funding was secured from local authority community development grants and the Arts Council England. The key methodologies and the core skills of the architect were the same as the LoveMilton project (see Table 12.3). Table 12.3 Project summary: LoveMilton Enablers & inputs

Key methodologies

Outputs & outcomes

Core skills of the architect: Architecture, graphic design, community engagement, project management, MD of a registered charity, building, instruction, fund raising, volunteer coordinator and supervisor, landscape design, events planning Funding: Scottish Climate Challenge Fund, Big Lottery Investing in Ideas, Big Lottery Awards for All, Princes Trust, Glasgow City Council, Glasgow Housing Association, AHRC Connected Communities Fund, Social Enterprise income from commercial activity

Use of agile Bespoke community frameworks centre Participation in place Training, education, A situated mode of and employment practice The means for a An ethical approach to more engaged practice community

Architecture and social value  231

Figure 12.10 Raise the Roof concept vision, and phase 1 construction.

In terms of the SDGs, both projects demonstrate a significant change. These projects are situated in areas considered to have multiple indicators of social deprivation and where economic, fuel, and food poverty are clearly evident amongst the community. Both projects seek to create social and physical infrastructure that provides access to the services and support that might alleviate these conditions. The establishment of community-led not-for-profit organisations and the delivery of physical infrastructure that can provide direct access to services, advice, skills, and produce are reducing poverty at the local level (SDG 1 No poverty, target 1.4). In Milton, the creation of a network of growing spaces, from a community orchard to the piloting of a community market garden, provide access to methodologies and outputs of sustainable urban food production and consumption. These projects are not designed to provide for the entire food needs of a community, but rather to act as a catalyst for changes in behaviour that compel healthier and more affordable food choices. Both of these projects also utilise the creation of small-scale civic infrastructure to provide opportunities for communal eating that makes consuming healthy and nutritious meals a regular social and cultural activity (SDG 2 Zero hunger). (See also Chapter 13 for a discussion about a Social Eating Network in Nottingham.) Both of the communities involved have high instances of unemployment, addiction, and other indicators of poor health. Creating the infrastructure that encourages and supports a shift from a sedentary lifestyle, established and perpetuated by unemployment and social isolation, provides an opportunity to be mentally and physically active. These communities require architecture and design to be used as a tool to increase access to moments of delight, joy, and activity. An active involvement in the making of small-scale architectural interventions in both locations is designed to create opportunities for healthy mental and physical exertion in a supportive, collegiate, and collaborative environment. These projects provide an opportunity to spend time

232  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett outside building, growing, and creating the infrastructure that can continue to sustain people and place, and thus contribute to SDG 3 Good health and well-being. Skills development and the offer of a more diverse range of learning experiences for people of all ages are inherent characteristics and tangible outcomes within the work produced in both Milton and Portland Street. Both of the temporary structures made with the Portland Inn Project have been designed to accommodate the delivery of diverse educational experiences. In Milton, a sustainable-build school was established following the delivery of skills workshops in collaboration with The Princes Trust that taught local people sustainable construction methodologies and then supported them into further education or the workplace (SDG 4 Quality education, targets 4.4 and 4.7, SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth, targets 8.5 and 8.6). Both projects understand that there is immense social value that can be created through the making of architecture, not just in its use following completion. In terms of SDG 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, at the heart of the work in Milton and Portland Street is a desire to use the improvement of place and the application of small-scale architecture to test new forms of local industry and establish the supporting infrastructure (target 9.1). In Milton, the establishment of a community café was used to train people in cookery and hospitality and generate income, and the creation of a sustainable construction school has been used to develop proposals for a permanent workshop space as a base for a sustainable construction social enterprise. In Portland Street, the initial temporary pavilion and the semi-permanent adapted shipping container have been used to create a range of bespoke ceramics, with local people using traditional and contemporary techniques. These objects are now being marketed for sale creating an innovative income stream for the organisation. The communities of Milton and Portland Street are denied access to essential services, support and opportunities through circumstance, marginalisation, and isolation. The physical and visual condition and location of these communities is a latent factor in establishing and perpetuating the inequality created by a lack of amenity, stigmatisation, and economic activity. The projects described in these case studies reduce a sense of isolation and inequality by creating new infrastructures of people and place that build capacity and empower. An active involvement in making new beautiful places and objects also creates individual and collective esteem and a sense of purpose that makes possible certain opportunities

Architecture and social value  233 that were previously unattainable (10 Reduced Inequalities). Also, by working directly with local people to provide the skills and support to reimagine and then re-create the social, cultural, environmental, and economic infrastructure to support and improve the lives of local people, we create more sustainable and resilient communities. The establishment of new physical infrastructure is utilised as a tool to simultaneously establish new social and cultural organisational infrastructure that can then maintain and progress the improvement of place by creating programmes of activity. Organisational capacity is created and grown through an approach of ‘learning through doing’ and then evidencing success to generate further financial and stakeholder support for local initiatives. A collective behaviour that is organic, agile, and sustainable is created from the bottom-up, rather than imposed from the top-down (11 Sustainable cities and communities, targets 11.3 and 11.4). This, in turn, helps support responsible consumption and production (SDG  12, targets 12.2, 12.3, and 12.8): these projects deliver local infrastructure in the form of new productive green space, workshops, and places from which essential produce can be created and consumed. This infrastructure creates opportunities for local production of food, ceramics, clothing, art with re-use, sustainable waste-management, and resourcefulness at its heart. Finally, with regard to SDG 13 Climate action (target 13.3), the LoveMilton project delivered small-scale live-build community projects that demonstrated environmental construction methods, established ideas and systems of localism, utilised waste materials, facilitated recycling initiatives, and reduced energy demand in the home, community spaces, and work environments. The work with the Portland Inn Project also continued this emphasis on re-use and reducing the need to travel to access essential services and support. All of our projects in Stoke used reclaimed and locally sourced materials in their construction. In summary, these two case studies propose a variety of ways in which the role of the architect, the process of design, and the delivery of architecture can create social value through tactical decisions. They provide evidence in support of alternative and agile modes of praxis that challenge established ideas about how architecture can be commissioned and how architecture might be delivered. These projects involved intensive methods of participation and engagement; most importantly, the architect being involved with the lives of the people and places identified in these case studies. The success of this mode of practice relies on an empathic and ethical approach to using active participation in the existing conditions and lives of these communities as the primary method for informing design and the establishment of new infrastructures. The

234  Simon Kay-Jones and Lee Ivett participation and leadership of local people in these processes is then the ingredient that sustains them, secures them, and that ultimately creates social value. Both case studies showcase tactically made practical material choices that achieve social value.

Chapter summary In architecture, the practice of the profession (its praxis), the choice of strategies in developing and coordinating projects, and the material choices that architects tactically elect all offer opportunities for considering, creating, and delivering social value. Architects have a core set of skills for enabling and developing social value, and for using and integrating legislative and regulatory requirements to champion social value. Collaboration and participation, and agile frameworks, are important strategies for encouraging innovative practice through flat and open structured processes. These enable the analysis of the full potential for social value in a dynamic fashion, by adapting processes, roles, and plans throughout the project life cycle. Together with making sustainable tactical decisions about the choice of materials and the framing of material choices, we illustrate how many SDGs can be achieved thought architectural practice.

References Assemble (2013) Granby four streets, Liverpool: Assemble, https://assemblestudio. co.uk/projects/granby-four-streets-2 [accessed 8 January 2021]. Awan, N., Schneider, T. and Till, J. (2011) Spatial agency: Other ways of doing architecture, Abingdon: Routledge. BRE (2021) BREEAM, Watford: Building Research Establishment (BRE) Ltd, https://www.breeam.com/ [accessed 8 January 2021]. Cardiff University (2020) Grange Pavilion, Cardiff: Cardiff University, https://www. cardiff.ac.uk/community-gateway/our-projects/community-meeting-places/ grange-gardens-bowls-pavilion [accessed 8 January 2021]. CEN (2021) CEN/TC 350- Sustainability of construction works, European Committee for Standardization (CEN), https://standards.cen.eu/dyn/www/f?p=204:7:0::::FSP_ ORG_ID:481830&cs=181BD0E0E925FA84EC4B8BCCC284577F8 [accessed 8 January 2021]. Fjord (2021) Connecting Kenyan consumers with African artisans, Fjordnet Limited, https://www.fjordnet.com/workdetail/connecting-kenyan-consumers-withafrican-artisans/ [accessed 8 January 2021]. Gething, B. (2011) Green overlay to the RIBA outline plan of work, London: Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). Hong Kong Green Building Council (2021) BEAM Plus, Hong Kong: Hong Kong Green Building Council Ltd, https://www.hkgbc.org.hk/eng/beam-plus/beamplus-new-buildings/index.jsp [accessed 8 January 2021].

Architecture and social value  235 International WELL Building Institute (2021) WELL health and safety rating, New York: International WELL Building Institute, https://www.wellcertified.com/ [accessed 14 April 2021]. RIBA (2020) RIBA plan of work, London: RIBA, https://www.architecture.com/ knowledge-and-resources/resources-landing-page/riba-plan-of-work [accessed 14 April 2021]. U.S. Green Building Council (2021) LEED rating system, Washington, DC: U.S. Green Building Council, https://www.usgbc.org/leed [accessed 8 January 2021]. World Green Building Council (2016) Whole life carbon vision, London: World Green Building Council, https://www.worldgbc.org/advancing-net-zero/wholelife-carbon-vision [accessed 8 January 2021].

13 Delivering social value through planning – local authority as a leader and enabler Laura Alvarez

This chapter presents a city planning perspective on considering, creating, and delivering social value in placemaking. Nottingham City Council is our focus local authority, and we trace their transformation process that has enabled an open, democratic, continuous stakeholder engagement to take shape and form a key aspect of their new Design Quality Framework. The discussion also connects to a local ‘Social Eating’ network as a way to showcase how Nottingham City Council’s approach to planning and the social value of places manifests. We demonstrate how their processes help achieve selected Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specifically, SDGs 3 Good

•

Building social cohesion, reducing loneliness and isolation, increasing health and wellbeing, tackling food poverty and childhood obesity

• • •

Understanding of community connectivity Social structure analysis and social network mapping Trust and social capital; theability of people to organise and work together

• •

Process audit Collaborative engagement process involving local authority officers from all relevant departments, industry experts, community groups and volunteer residents Community Engagement Guideand related training

•

• • •

Engaging with the civic society groups and organisations, the Government, designers and developers Integrating expert and local knowledge Social eating

Figure 13.1 A city planning perspective on creating and delivering social value and selected SDGs.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-16

Delivering social value through planning  237 health and well-being, 11 Sustainable cities and communities, 16 Peace, justice, and strong institutions, and 17 Partnership for the goals, and also 4 Quality education, 9 Industry, innovation, and infrastructure, 12 Responsible consumption and production, and 13 Climate action.

Social value of place in planning In city planning terms, social value is often associated with the capacity places have to deliver social sustainability. A socially sustainable settlement not only meets the basic needs of its residents. Crucially, it also helps create communities be able to maintain and build their own resources, as well as be resilient to prevent and address problems in the future. A good level of social resilience depends on the understanding of local assets and resources, and the collective ability to manage them. Some scholars (Rowson et al., 2010; Awan et al., 2011) argue that an optimum outcome in social assets, through policy, can only be achieved with a better understanding of community connectivity and that development cannot be completely successful if it does not take into account local social structures. However, it should be noted that social structure analysis and social network mapping are still not fully understood and are often regarded as beyond the remit of technical planning issues. In the UK, social variables of place are often overlooked in construction and it is still unclear to the industry how the planning system can help achieve social sustainability in practice.Place appraisals rarely include social analysis, and proposals tend to omit social targets (such as building social cohesion, reducing loneliness and isolation, increasing health and well-being, and tackling food poverty and childhood obesity) that could be addressed at a local level through placemaking. Development is delivered through a range of processes with a strong bias towards economic factors, which is evidenced by the focus on value engineering and the absence of social output and/or outcome evaluation and relevant social currencies. Despite an increasing interest in environmental issues, it is still very rare to see a site analysis that considers social variables. Some designers are still confused about the meaning of the term ‘placemaking’ and they lack the tools to develop proposals with an optimum social impact. Figure 13.2 illustrates three spheres of sustainable development and some of the tools that designers could apply to conduct place appraisals. Placemaking is an effective vehicle to deliver social value because it is a process that interprets urban regeneration as being driven by three principles as

238  Laura Alvarez

Figure 13.2 The three spheres of sustainable development and some of the site appraisal tools.

shown in Figure  13.3. Placemaking builds up on those assets and exploits those opportunities to meet people’s needs. The civic society, which is formed by groups and organisations that work independently from the government, is a place asset that is rarely considered, but hugely relevant to the success of developments. Non-governmental institutions are crucial to placemaking because members share goals, develop habits, and establish norms (Halpern, 2005). Placemaking works best when it integrates expert and local knowledge in a collaborative process (Arefi, 2014), and when participation considers critical thinking, planning abilities, and skills building during the planning and design processes (Kennedy, 2003; cited in Arefi, 2014). However, participation in planning is still mainly focused on delivering site-specific, top-down, unidirectional consultation events that discuss the product: a design, in a specific moment in time. In best-practice cases, participation is about information and opinions the community can give to designers and developers to inform schemes. Instead, engagement is a continuous, collaborative, multidirectional approach that focuses on the process itself, but it is still rare to find examples of good practice. Engagement is about what the design, planning, and building  processes can offer to communities to help them build social resilience.

Delivering social value through planning  239

Figure 13.3 Placemaking delivering social value.

In practice, active and inclusive participation has been difficult to achieve. Tallon (2013) found that the main constraint at a personal level was the lack of trust in society, and that, in order to achieve good results, bridges have to be built between the parts involved and those sectors that could potentially feel excluded. Virtually every piece of research, they add, shows the direct relationship between education, especially at university level, and social capital. Social capital is crucial to the success of participation and empowerment because it is structured by a series of relations between people, which are based on trust. It lays in the ability of people to organise and work together, a capability that is fundamental to the idea of social sustainability (Francis Fukuyama, n.d. cited in John Elkington, 2002). Social capital enables communities to achieve social interaction, shared goals, cooperativism, participation, and access to information and resources, empowering people to perform to their full capacity in order to develop their skills and to manage their assets (Grunter and Kroll-Smith, 2007; Tallon, 2013). With the reform of the National Planning Policy Framework (2014), the ‘decentralisation of power’ agenda by the British Conservative government initiated a period of increased neighbourhood engagement and governance through the introduction of Neighbourhood Plans and other planning mechanisms like Local Development Orders and Local Listings. This was a very positive change in planning, but these strategies were not compulsory and underprivileged communities often found themselves lacking the resources and skills to deliver them. The technical complexity of the British

240  Laura Alvarez planning system became a barrier in many urban areas. Community empowerment should not rely on existing social capital, but it should find appropriate mechanisms to build that capital upon existing assets, no matter how small and dispersed they might be. A planning system that delivers placemaking by exacerbating existing inequalities and disenfranchising disadvantaged groups from placemaking poses a risk to lower the capital at a national level in the long-term. The planning reform proposed by the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government in 2020 goes a step further by bringing community engagement to the early stages of the design process. With this new system, communities would engage in processes designed to prepare local policy and site-specific design codes, prior to any design taking place. The focus of the engagement would be on translating communities and local government expectations into design criteria and setting up measurable standards to evaluate the quality of planning proposals.

The capacity of the planning system Utilising existing social assets to engage in participatory frameworks and policymaking is crucial, but insufficient. The planning system in its current form has a much larger capacity to deliver social value by focusing on two main strands: social resilience and social capital. Social capital is a concept that many scholars from a variety of disciplines have adopted alongside human capital and cultural capital, by definition, to include (i) social norms and trust; and (ii) social relationships and networks. These two core strands give shape to societies and the ways in which people relate to each other (see, for example, Putman, 1995; Elkington, 2002; Halpern, 2005; Hester, 2006; Colantonio and Dixon, 2011; Ferragina, 2012; Tallon, 2013). Social capital relies on social norms, mutual trust, and the capacity of communities to form relationships and networks. Social resilience, however, depends on the capacity of communities to work together to resolve problems and create wealth. The planning system can deliver both social resilience and social capital at two core levels: •

•

Policymaking: incorporating social structure analysis as part of the baseline studies for policy development and delivering continuous engagement strategies that focus on targeting social variables through the process itself. Placemaking: incorporating social assets analysis as another technical requirement of planning submissions and demanding that developments with a public or shared place component offer opportunities to meet social targets.

Early involvement in placemaking processes and co-design can build up social cohesion, increase individual skills, self-esteem (Bishop and Williams,

Delivering social value through planning  241

Social value of place

Planning system

Capacity places have to deliver social sustainability.

Policy making Variables easily tackled through the planning process.

Social resilience Capacity of communies to work together to resolve problems and create wealth.

Social capital Social norms, mutual trust, capacity of communies to form relaonships and networks.

• Incorporang social structure analysis as part of the baseline studies for policy development. • Delivering connuous engagement strategies that focus on targeng social variables through the process itself.

Placemaking • Incorporang social assets analysis as another technical requirement of planning submissions. • Demanding that developments with a public or shared place component offer opportunies to meet social targets.

Figure 13.4 The capacity of the planning system to deliver social value of place.

2012), and knowledge transfer and acquisition (Awan et al., 2011). It can also increase the community capacity to act positively in times of crisis, building up a sense of belonging and strengthening social bonding (Dolan, 2012; Maahsen-Milan, 2013). Public place provision can enable the development of social networks through organised activities taking place in the locality, or simply by fostering repeated social interaction by design. Socially positive design prompts people to form networks to care for places around them, to improve them, and to make them suit their lifestyles. For example, a development that designates part of a shared green space for the creation of a community garden would have to include provision of lighting and power points, water, drainage, storage space, and adequate, inclusive access for people to work together in that space. This type of detail could be addressed through planning policy or guidance, which would make a huge difference to prompt the delivery of schemes that encourage community development through spaces designed to offer the opportunity to build up social resilience. The diagram below shows how planning policy could link to the social value deliverables (see Figure 13.4).

Design quality as a framework to deliver social value At the heart of Nottingham City Council’s current planning policy on social value is a newly formed ‘Design Quality Framework’. The development of this framework involved intensive periods of process auditing, commitment to ambitious carbon neutral goals, and stakeholder engagement.

242  Laura Alvarez Process audit and an ambition to become carbon neutral In 2017, Nottingham City Council received a Planning Delivery Fund from the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government, and this triggered a project dedicated to reviewing the quality of development in the city: The Design Quality Framework (see www.dqfnottingham.org.uk). Phase one of this project involved an audit of every planning application dated between January 2013 and January 2018. This internal study focused on looking at the quality of the product and the process from pre-application stage to delivery. The quality of building and place for housing development included a Building for Life assessment, a qualitative layout analysis, and a space standards quantitative analysis. The study of other types of development focused on layout, response to context, and façades resolution. The quality of the process focused on how long planning applications took from the first point of contact to planning approval, how many iterations were necessary to achieve good design, and how many planning conditions were given. The audit showed that schemes that engaged in pre-application resulted in permission being granted ten weeks earlier than those who did not engage, and on average had 11 fewer planning conditions. Trends were also found in relation to the type of recurring design issues and how these related to the information submitted for each stage. The cases with longer and more complicated processes tended to lack good site analysis and an upfront understanding of contextual conditions, constraints, and opportunities. The audit also showed that consultation of developer-led schemes was conducted on a site-specific basis using traditional approaches after the design had been resolved. In addition, consultation only occurred when it was required by law. Some strategic masterplans led by the authority used more comprehensive engagement methods, but overall, outreach, information sharing, follow-up, and post-occupancy analysis could have been stronger. The audit produced crucial data that informed the direction of travel for developing the Council’s Design Quality Framework. Officers realised that reviewing the planning process was as vital as setting critical design criteria for the city, and that addressing the three spheres of sustainability (see Figure 13.2), in equal measure, was important. At the time of the audit, Nottingham was set to declare its ambition to become carbon neutral by 2028. A team of expert officers produced a Carbon Neutral Plan that includes six carbon reduction priorities: resources, resilience, biodiversity, mobility, energy, and food. It was adamant that Design Quality Framework became a key planning tool to help meet these priorities. Reaching the carbon neutrality target requires systemsthinking and multi-disciplinary collaboration, which can only be achieved with some degree of flexibility and capacity to change and adapt. Traditionally, planning policy is written by

Delivering social value through planning  243 officers before going through a period of consultation followed by the adoption of policies that become a legal planning framework in place for at least a decade. This contradiction between static, fixed planning practices, and the need to tackle the multiple, ever-changing, interconnected variables of the urban ecosystem meant that a new form of planning was necessary: a planning system that could work with flexible policies. Crucially, the carbon neutrality target could not be met with a top-down approach; it required commitment from all parties and a level of individual and corporate responsibility that could only be developed by working in partnership. It was clear that achieving carbon reduction required changes in attitudes and behaviours, a cultural transformation that was only possible with multiple agencies taking part in activities and becoming rooted in the cause through action. This requirement to be inclusive and cooperative offered the opportunity to explore the issue of quality from a number of different perspectives. The social approach to delivering design quality highlighted the fact that what is of value to some might not be to others. Figure 13.5 illustrates how the process works, and which components are essential for success: to begin with, a culture of change requires political and administrative leadership that is both focused and robust; only when there is a strong, coherent, and consistent way of working – within and across departments – the planning systems can adapt to incorporate policies and placemaking procedures that deliver social value through clear, open, democratic engagement processes.

Leadership

Culture of change

Politicians and directors understand and champion the delivery of social value of place.

Politicians, directors and officers embrace a culture of change and are happy to discuss fears and anxieties openly.

Planning system upgrade

3. Policy writing

4. Evaluation Flexible policy making cycle

Policy making • Incorporating social structure analysis as part of the baseline studies for policy development. • Delivering continuous engagement strategies that focus on targeting social variables through the process itself.

Placemaking • Incorporating social assets analysis as another technical requirement of planning submissions. • Demanding that developments with a public or shared place component offer opportunities to meet social targets.

1. Social analysis informs

informs

2. Engagement

Redefined role of planning officer: coordinator and specialist assessor

2. Engagement informs

informs

1. Social analysis

LA training and multidisciplinary workshops including all parties (all departments, politicians and directors)

3. Site vision

4. Proposals Placemaking requirements

Figure 13.5 Model for the production of flexible planning policy to deliver social value of place.

244  Laura Alvarez Engagement process The Design Quality Framework Overview document and the initial guides on Housing, Streets, and Façades were developed through a collaborative engagement process involving local authority officers from all relevant departments, industry experts, community groups, and volunteer residents (see Figure 13.6). The guides were written by the Design Quality Framework team and criteria were based on both the results of the audit and the outcomes of the engagement process. This approach might come across as time-consuming and resource-hungry; however, one urban design officer planned and completed seven design guides in 18 months with the support of community groups, industry professionals, and colleagues. The delivery of Nottingham Design Quality Framework required one part-time officer running the project. Additionally, ad-hoc participation from a number of disciplines, adding up to an estimated two hours of officer time per week for the course of 18 months, was also crucial to cover the various fields of expertise. A total of circa 50 weeks of staff time were invested in delivering the first seven documents and continuous engagement strategy. Financial support from the Planning Delivery Fund (from the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government) facilitated the delivery of events, websites, and printed materials. DQF ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS 2. Workshop: need, aims & objectives of guide

6. Design Guide is adopted as SPD

3. Workshop: content and structure of guide

All the different departments that relate ton built environment and community work Decision takers

NCC D staff E A B

Sep

Nov

Figure 13.6 Design Quality Framework engagement strategy.

Dec

Co-PLACE launch

Jan

DQ conference

WDG launch Oct

Xmas break

Aug

Feb

Mar

28.01.20 - A – Co-PLACE Opening Session 11.02.20 - G – HDG 12.02.20 – G - Bridges 27.02.20 - A – Co-PLACE Session 1 (CEG) 06.03.20 – G – Beauty - 10.03.20 - E – FDG COVID-19 PERIOD

Co-PLACE created Jul

2020

16.01.20 - A – WDG

Jun

14.11.19 - D – DQF + CEG 18.11.19 - G – DQF + WDG 28.11.19 - G – DQF in general

May

25.04.19 - F – HDG + FDG + SDG 28.04.19 - C – LCDG + FDG 02.05.19 - C – LCDG + FDG 20.05.19 - F – DQFO + HDG + FDG + SDG

20.03.19 - G – DQFO + HDG + FDG + SDG 25.03.19 - E – DQFO + HDG + FDG + SDG

Apr

Summer break

DQF Web launch Mar

04.03.19 - G - LCDG

17.01.19 - C - LCDG

14.02.19 - G - LCDG

Xmas break

11.01.19 - G - FDG

Feb

20.08.19 - C – DQF + WDG 22.08.19 - A – DQF + WDG 02.09.19 - A – DQF + CEG 18.09.19 - G – DQF + WDG 03.10.19 - G – DQF + WDG 09.10.19 - A – DQF + SFDG 15.10.19 - G – DQF in general

Jan

Partnership with NGFP begins

Dec

2019

04.06.19 - C – LCDG + FDG 09.06.19 - G – WDG 10.06.19 - E – SDG 20.06.19 - C – DQFO + HDG + FDG + SDG 22.06.19 - G – WDG 01.07.19 - G – DQF 09.07.19 - G – DQF

2019

Partnership with CO begins Nov

06.11.18 – E - SDG 12 & 15.11.18 - E - FDG 20.11.18 - G - DQFO + HDG + SDG + FDG 28.11.18 – E - FDG

Oct

07.09.18 – E - HDG 12.09.18 – E - SDG 08.10.18 - F - DQFO + HDG + SDG + FDG

ENGAGEMENT EVENTS

2018

DQF to become United Nations Sustainable Development Goals best practice example

- More than 1000 people engaged to date -

Design Guide proposal/idea

dd.mm.yy – Who engaged – Engagement topic

F

Community groups and organisations Residents - Hard to reach groups - Schools Under-represented communities - Businesses

5. Revised draft goes online

TIMELINE

Sep

Industry C

NCC: Nottingham City Council UR: Urban Room www.38carringtonstreet.org.uk DQF: Design Quality Framework DQFO: DQF Overview document HDG: Housing Design Guide HHDG: Householders Design Guide SDG: Streets Design Guide FDG: Façades Design Guide CEG: Community Engagement Guide WDG: Wellbeing Design Guide SFDG: Shopfronts Design Guide LCDG: Local Character Design Guide Co-PLACE: Community Programme to Learn and Action in the City Environment www.co-place.org

Built environment professionals Developers Professional organisations

Community G

4. Workshop: testing the draft with real life case Online feedback channel permanently opened

ABBREVIATIONS

SPHERES OF ENGAGEMENT

1. Design Guide proposal/idea

Apr

Delivering social value through planning  245 Local authority officers acted as facilitators, juggling all the different aspects of the engagement process and managing the project to ensure coordinated action and timely delivery. Officers also acted as mentors, sharing their technical knowledge openly with participants as and when it was needed. All parties explained their own expectations and voiced their goals at the beginning of each stage in the process. Participants worked together to resolve language jargon difficulties as they emerged, which resulted in a set of guidance documents that everyone could understand and advocate. Critically, an organisation called Community Organisers, which is a charity dedicated to helping communities act around their common concerns and overcome social injustice, assisted the authority in outreaching minorities and groups that wouldn’t normally seek to comment on policy development. Their involvement was crucial to raise levels of trust, expand existing networks, and foster collective thinking. The engagement process adopted a bottom-up approach that began on day one of the project and which continues to the date of this publication. With this engagement model, adopted policy is not fixed and it will continue to evolve for the foreseeable future. The Community Engagement Guide, which was developed and written in partnership with Community Organisers, went a step further. It introduced significant changes to the ways in which applicants were expected to plan, conduct, and document engagement strategies in the city. Such was the level of innovation and commitment to the criteria in this guide, a tailored training programme had to be developed to bring all parties involved up to speed with the changes. As the carbon neutral target demanded fast action, conducting training first, followed by then implementing changes was not an option. Instead, a programme called Co-PLACE (www.co-place.org) was developed to both learn and act simultaneously. Launched in January 2020, the Community Programme to Learn and Action in the City Environment included five full-day sessions and a sixth session for those who wished to become a trainer. Day sessions took place both at the Urban Room (www. 38carringtonstreet.org.uk), and online during the Coronavirus pandemic. The format included a morning workshop to acquire essential community organising skills (see Table 13.1), a lunch break and an afternoon workshop to develop tools for direct application in the planning system. All the experience gained, and the tools developed, formed a package available to download through the Design Quality Framework website. The Wellbeing Design Guide was proposed to the City Council by Nottingham Good Food Partnership, who had engaged in workshops for previous Design Quality Framework guides. The group had concerns about missed opportunities to design with consideration of green infrastructure and food systems in the city, at a time of unprecedented growth. With the support of Community Organisers and Nottingham City Council

246  Laura Alvarez Table 13.1 Co-PLACE sessions content Co-PLACE Sessions

CO skills

½ day – Awareness

Why it matters – What is your role? – Future of planning Listening skills Planning process Conflict management Quality tools & guides Empowering Design process Calling to action Communication Placemaking tools Influencing design Delivery of facilitation Becoming a trainer Becoming a trainer

1 Day – Session 1 1 Day – Session 2 1 Day – Session 3 1 Day – Session 4 1 Day – Session 5 1 Day + 1 delivery Trainers graduate

Planning skills

officers, the group conducted an engagement strategy based on the social eating ethos. They gathered best-practice examples and wrote a set of design criteria that was lightly edited by the council to align with other local policies. The Wellbeing Design Guide is one of the first ever Design Quality Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) in the UK and was conceived, developed, and written entirely by a community group. The technical aspects associated with integrating food systems in buildings and public spaces,treatment of soil, waste reuse, and circular economy principles (see Chapter 7 for details and examples regarding circular economy) are explored through the Wellbeing Design Guide. As industry was not yet ready to answer the call and make the change to delivering development in more thoughtful ways that meet softer targets, a Climate Adaptation Learning and Action (CALA) programme was created. The scheme had a similar in format to Co-PLACE: participants were going to learn by doing and, at the same time, they were going to create tools for wider application in practice. Unfortunately, CALA was delayed by the Coronavirus pandemic, but the plan is to deliver the programme when participants can work safely. The Wellbeing Design Guide is a piece of planning policy that gives weight to the need to consider green issues from the early design stages. Nottingham’s food carbon reduction priority of the Carbon Neutral 2028 plan became twofold embedded in the Design Quality Framework: through the design criteria and through the Wellbeing Design Guide development process. The latter was critically important to showcase how existing social assets and tools like social eating can be integrated successfully in planning processes. During the Design Quality Framework engagement project, social eating was implemented as a tool to collect data and to generate and strengthen social networks (see Figure 13.7).

Delivering social value through planning  247 Planning policy

NATIONAL DESIGN GUIDE Nottingham’s URBAN DESIGN GUIDE

Appraisal tools

Design Guides

2019

Housing

2019

Streets

2019

Façades

2019

Householder

2019

Community Engagement

2020

Wellbeing Future Guides

Planning process improvements

Co-PLACE

Community Programme to Learn and Action in the City Environment

CALA

Internal to NCC

Climate Adaptation Learning & Action Programme

Partners

CE tools and strategies 2020

Resource

Biodiversity

Resilience

Energy 2021

Mobility

Foodscapes 2020

Energy

Food

Priorities for Carbon Reduction

Figure 13.7 Design Quality Framework aligned to the Carbon Neutral Priorities for Nottingham.

Use of social eating as a tool to deliver social value through planning – Marsha Smith The Nottingham social eating network In 2017, Nottingham City Council declared its desire to be recognised as the UK’s first‘social eating city’ (BBC, 2018). There are around 15 identified social eating groups in the city, informally known as the Nottingham social eating network. Since their inception in 2010, the value of this network continues to increase by supporting residents who experience food insecurity, whilst simultaneously promoting social cohesion and acting as exemplars of localised food waste and food carbon reduction practices. The network operates a community food model that, as proposed by Luca et al. (2019), can address food insecurity, support health, well-being, and social capital. This ‘public mealtime’ provisioning increases opportunities to develop food socialisation and food literacy (Bublitz et al., 2013, 2019; Luca et al., 2019) and provides important place and space-based services that extend food choice, accessibility, and availability (Blake, 2019).

248  Laura Alvarez

Figure 13.8 Social eating during the housing design guide engagement at Nottingham’s Urban Room in 2018 (on the left) and Social eating during the Wellbeing Design Guide engagement at the food growing festival in Nottingham’s Arboretum in 2019 (on the right).

Although social eating spaces may have emerged to support the development of ‘food social capital’ in its broadest sense, this well-established, city-wide platform and its ‘eatingtogether’ approach provided the ideal platform for the Design Quality Framework engagement programme. The ‘eatingtogether’ approach considers social eating initiatives as capacity places: material spaces where the insights of stakeholders were gathered, spaces where plans were refined and where relationships between placemaking partners could grow and consolidate. Social eating workshops and debates The process of social eating as a planning tool was implemented in the Urban Room space via a series of meal-centred workshops where participants introduced themselves by first name alone; removing institutional associations. Social eating-based open debates were also undertaken at local food markets and community food events, confirming how social eating can facilitate non-food-related research (Blake, 2019a; Holmes et al., 2020). The social eating approach assembled a diverse array of stakeholders and partners, constructing a convivial container where ideas were seeded and developed. This allowed potentially controversial resource and infrastructure-needs to be surfaced in non-confrontational ways. After meals, participants produced a written record of their group conversations. This process of ‘mingling, observing and lingering’ (Cattell et al., 2008) supported the development of authentic articulation; all participants were afforded the opportunity to debate and ‘voice’ their thoughts.

Delivering social value through planning  249 The sharing of food in the Urban Room, enacted as part of a city-wide series of continuous open debates, endorses the utility of creative kinds of empirical research that are described as ‘community-based participatory research’ (Chung-Chun et al., 2005; Reason and Bradbury, 2006). Social eating both engaged participants and created a focus for, and rhythm to, the open dialogue. Sharing food with participants created convivial conditions where the interagency thinking necessary for addressing complex issues, such as food carbon reduction, could emerge (see also Doyle and Davies, 2013). Eating together with the public, then, created opportunities to gather data not necessarily afforded during formal consulting events and could be usefully replicated by construction companies, for example, as part of a suite of community engagement activities. Moreover, interpersonal sharing of food is a fundamental feature of social life, both as a ‘mechanism through which sustenance is secured and as a means to cement social relations’ (Davies et al., 2017). Participants engaging in multiple, open debate events strengthened their relationships, which enabled dialogues to foment and be shaped by context and place. These continuous open debates, occurring over the longerterm, revealed where social value could be enfolded into planning ideation. These emergent ideas and concepts drew upon the wider skills, networks and values of participants and their varying organisational emphases and remits in a spirit of mutualism (Björgvinsson et al., 2010; DiSalvo et al., 2012, 2014). For example, a vertical hydroponic farm developed by Nottingham Trent University was placed temporarily at the Urban Room to enable various community groups to become familiar with the operation and running of the equipment. The farm was later donated to a social eating enterprise. The Design Quality Framework research occurring in these spaces afforded everyone involved an opportunity to understand how citizens can become ‘beneficiaries and co-creators of value’ (Mathie and Cunningham, 2003). Grassroots commensality-activism can be understood here as spaces of progressive possibilities, articulating newly emerging and not-yet-formed responses to broader social challenges. For example, this includes the access, availability, and affordability of food or food wastage (Blake, 2019a,b), and which extends to dialogues around food carbon reduction practices (Doyle and Davies, 2013).

Lessons learnt: the challenges and main gains of the journey to open, democratic, and continuous community engagement The transition from a traditional patriarchal, site-specific, t imeconstrained consultation style to an open, democratic, continuous

250  Laura Alvarez The Design Quality Framework in a nutshell The Design Quality Framework was designed to achieve social value of place by taking the opportunities the planning system has to offer, and pairing them with capacities existing in local social networks to: • • • • • •

Sit under national, regional, and local planning policy, Be adopted as formal guidance in order to bear some weight, Deliver the carbon reduction priorities, Focus on both the quality of the product and the process, Be a flexible piece of planning policy to be easily adapted, Allow continuous input from multi-agencies, existing social assets, and individual residents.

The process of engagement resulted in a set of design criteria achieved by consensus amongst all parties. The criteria were crystallised in a series of interconnected design guides structured around the following components: • • • • • •

An explanation of a staged planning process and the minimum requirements for submission at each stage, A set of key design criteria and the justification for making these a requirement, A set of case studies showcasing best practice and the consequences of poor practice, An appraisal tool to measure compliance, which works with a simple traffic light system, An online platform available to the public where guides can be downloaded and where comments can be submitted to the Design Quality Framework team, A physical space that acts as both a neutral hub for discussions and a project incubator: Nottingham’s Urban Room.

The Urban Room was brought to life by a partnership (consisting of Nottingham City Council, Historic England, Urban Design Group, Royal Institute of British Architects, Nottingham and Derby Society of Architects, Nottingham Trent University, and University of Nottingham) and funded by the Carrington Street Heritage Action Zone Lottery Fund and a group of volunteers. It is a neutral, shared space where people, organisations, and stakeholders can dream, plan, and debate development in the city as well as create innovative projects.

engagement process has been a transformational journey, and Nottingham City have continued developing the project at the time of this publication. The main challenges did not relate, as initially suspected, to

Delivering social value through planning  251 the lack of resources, or the need to deliver timely projects. Organised voluntary action resulted in additional support to a local authority that was struggling for resources. The primary project management goal was to achieve consensus and collaboration between the parties. Deadlines and time constraints were explained, with clarity from the outset, to all participants and the groups were organised to deliver to established timeframes (SDG 17 Partnerships for the goals, target 17.17, to encourage and promote effective public, public-private, and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships). Unexpectedly, the barriers faced during the process related to three deeply interconnected issues: the lack of trust amongst parties, anxieties regarding a perceived transition of power, and the fear of relinquishing control. The lack of trust amongst agencies was evident from the outset. Based on a long history of mediocre participation and disempowerment throughout a planning process, communities feared that they might fall into a type of consultation that did not give them a true voice. They were also worried about investing time on events that did not guarantee that their comments would be considered. Industry professionals were hesitant, claiming that they had a suspicion that there would be little follow-up and no action. However, officers felt that communities might continue bringing up a range of issues that were unrelated to the planning system and which they could not influence in their technical, apolitical capacity. There were some reservations that the time officers invested in engagement would outweigh the gains. Officers also expressed concerns over the dangers and risks associated with handing over projects that required high levels of skills to unqualified participants. The gains achieved through the Design Quality Framework process are too many to number, and the most fundamental outcomes relate to forming new partnerships and building bridges amongst antagonistic agencies with confronted goals. Both technical staff and community members gained knowledge, information, and skills that equipped them for long-term placemaking action. Common goals were established and therefore the planning policy that emerged was immediately well understood, highly supported, and championed by all agencies. Valuable tools were developed whilst simultaneously creating an army of specialists ready to share knowledge and to put policies into action. Partnerships were created and a whole range of innovative projects came to life, especially because groups that had not worked together before could connect their assets, skills, and experience.

252  Laura Alvarez Table 13.2  Challenges found through the Design Quality Framework process Challenges/ barriers

Assumption

Actual outcome

Key ingredients for Main gains success

Lack of resources (perceived)

More officers’ time spent in delivering engagement

Additional Strong community Established support to assets: skills, partnerships, local authority commitment, increased trust, through physical space, bridges built voluntary action social cohesion Meet all deadlines Organisation, Fewer resources due to careful project leader invested. planning and conducting Voluntary action coordination meticulous and partnerships project add expertise in management specific fields

Need to deliver Communities projects cannot be timely expected (perceived) to work to deadlines, especially since they are volunteering Data protection Not utilising all Engagement Transparency Building up trust. and refusal the data about focused on about lack of Improved to disclose the proposals site conditions, data disclosure. collaboration. information would hinder lifestyles and Honesty about Increased focus (actual) engagement site vision was the limitations on the aspects processes sufficient to the of engagement of the scheme success of the in influencing that could be engagement the scheme influenced process Lack of trust Lack of trust Lack of trust Clarification about Over time the (actual) would be was an issue motivations, process achieved a problem through the powers and increased levels at outreach process. It was intentions from of trust to the stages and it the main reason the outset and point that most would diminish for delays and at every step of participants during the conflict the way became key engagement stakeholders in long-term partnerships Anxieties regarding a perceived transition of power and fear to relinquish control (actual)

Expectation that Delays in the this would process. happen at a Inability to personal level, proceed with but it would some stages not manifest without during the working on process reducing fears

Early training Development of to officers shared language. regarding the Progression benefits of towards new bottom-up role of technical engagement. staff. Confidence Honest growth amongst communication. participants. Increased levels of trust and co-operativism Data protection Not utilising all Engagement Transparency Building up trust. and refusal the data about focused on about lack of Improved to disclose the proposals site conditions, data disclosure. collaboration. information would hinder lifestyles and Honesty about Increased focus (actual) engagement site vision was the limitations on the aspects processes sufficient to the of engagement of the scheme success of the in influencing that could be engagement the scheme influenced process

Delivering social value through planning  253 Last, but not least, a case was made that this type of planning is not only possible, but it is also highly beneficial for all. Table 13.2 provides further details about the different challenges, assumptions, outcomes, ingredients for success, and main gains. One specific and significant barrier was the management of protected data and information that some parties refused to share at certain times during the process. Particularly challenging was working with case studies that were in pre-application stage, or where sensitive negotiation tactics were part of the agenda. Initially, the issue of data protection narrowed the spectrum and reduced the amount of case studies that could form part of the process. Over time, project managers and key project leaders found a way to continue the engagement process whilst limiting the amount of data shared. For example, they focused on aspects of the site, its environment, and the lifestyles of users, rather than disclosing the proposals. Similar case studies already published in different localities were used in lieu of sensitive data. All in all, the issue of data protection did not hinder the strength of the process. It is important to note that the Design Quality Framework engagement in Nottingham focused on the city as a whole, looking at a variety of sites, design proposals, and public places simultaneously to establish a set of city-wide design criteria. In site-specific consultation events where the focus of debate is a particular design, it might be more difficult to engage various stakeholders and achieve a meaningful debate if some crucial information is lacking. This demonstrates one of the advantages of continuous city-wide engagement strategies versus site-specific consultations. The success of the scheme is not coincidental. A project that pushes the boundaries and aims to change status quo in a risk-adverse industry like construction can only be delivered with a strong leadership. At a senior directory level, there was a conviction that change was necessary to think holistically and to tackle a multitude of issues at once. Nottingham City Council staff had been working alongside decision takers in the city for many years. These groups got to know each other well and established a platform of what constituted best practice for Nottingham, including agreeing what direction development had to take to deliver the shared vision for the city. This level playing field was a fundamental, critical baseline upon which to build up the Design Quality Framework and its engagement strategy. Next steps Following the launch of the Design Quality Framework, Nottingham committed to deliver further guides and to revise the published guides regularly on the basis of continuous engagement feedback and the results of design quality audit loops, in relation to SDG 16 Peace, justice, and strong institutions, targets 16.6, to develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels, and 16.7, to ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels.

254  Laura Alvarez Nottingham aims to become a city where open, transparent, continuous community engagement is delivered across all fields working in unison. In that vision, citizens from all backgrounds are empowered, will know how to express a collective voice, will be able to write planning policy and become involved in co-designing proposals, and will plan for managing and maintaining community assets and public places (SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communities, target 11.3, to enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanisation and capacity for participatory, integrated, and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries). The apex of the Design Quality Framework is a planning system that helps the population take the city in their own hands through organised, fair, equitable, and democratic collaboration, in a process that is always supported and monitored by technical staff. For this vision to become a reality, the role of planning officers must evolve to that of ‘coordinator and specialist assessor’, as opposed to the current role of ‘guardian and executor’ of planning strategies. This significant change requires new skills and strong commitment from everyone involved and the Design Quality Framework includes strategies that secure this delivery. To date, the Design Quality Framework implementation process delivered social value of place by: • • • •

Adopting a permanently ongoing engagement process to deliver design policies Reviewing planning power systems by creating a collaborative, democratic framework for design policy delivery Adopting a Placemaking ethos by creating a collective, consensual framework for design processes and criteria for development in the city Reviewing the role of the local authority by moving towards facilitation and assets coordination as opposed to execution.

Independently of the course of action the city takes in the future, the Design Quality Framework project has demonstrated that the current planning system, particularly its process, has the capacity to build up social resilience and to increase social capital. Perhaps planning is the most evident tool local authorities have at hand to understand and deliver the social value of place. For discussion about urban planning internationally, see Dementia Village: https://www.dementiavillage.com/ Florida, R. and McLean, J.W. (2017) What Inclusive Urban Development Can Look Like, Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2017/07/ what-inclusive-urban-development-can-look-like Ahmed, K. and Montu, R.I. (2021) The making of a megacity: how Dhaka transformed in 50 years of Bangladesh, The Guardian, 26 March, https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/mar/26/ the-making-of-a-megacity-how-dhaka-transfor med-in-50-years-ofbangladesh

Delivering social value through planning  255

Chapter summary This chapter focuses on the capacity of the British planning system to deliver social value of place through policy, through guidance, and by fostering placemaking practices. The Design Quality Framework developed and implemented by the Nottingham City Council shows how the local authority fostered a culture of change that enabled authorities, industry, and communities to work together, overcoming barriers and making the most of their existing assets and resources, in their ambition to become the first carbon neutral city in the UK. We also focus on the important role that social eating can play in engaging people in considering and responding to social challenges.

References Arefi, M. (2014) Deconstructing placemaking, London: Routledge. Awan, N., Schneider, T. and Till, J. (2011) Spatial agency: Other ways of doing architecture, Abingdon: Routledge. BBC News (2018) Nottingham UK’s first social eating city, https://www.bbc.co.uk/ news/av/uk-england-nottinghamshire-38669824/nottingham-s-uk-first-socialeating-aim [accessed 4 February 2018]. Bishop, P. and Williams, L. (2012) The temporary city, Abingdon: Routledge. Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. and Hillgren, P.A. (2010) Participatory design and democratizing innovation. In Robertson, T. (Ed.) Proceedings of the 11th Biennial participatory design conference, New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery, November, 41–50. Blake, M. (2019a) More than just food: Everyday food insecurity and resilient place making through community self- organising, Sustainability, 11(10), 2942. Blake, M. (2019b) Food ladders: A multi-scaled approach to everyday food security and community resilience’, Researchgate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333878382_Food_Ladders_A_multi-scaled_approach_to_everyday_food_ security_and_community_resilience [accessed 7 May 2020]. Bublitz, M., Peracchio, L., Andreasen, A., Kees, J., Kidwell, B., Miller, E., Motley, C., Peter, P., Rajagopal, P., Scott, M. and Vallen, B. (2013) Promoting positive change: Advancing the food well-being paradigm. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1211. Cattell, V., Dines, N., Gesler, W. and Curtis, S. (2008) Mingling, observing, and lingering: Everyday public spaces and their implications for well-being and social relations. Health & Place, 14(3), 544–561. Chun-Chung, C. and Crowe, K. (2005) Community-based research and methods in Community Practice, In Weil, M. (ed.), The handbook of community practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 604–619. Colantonio, A., Dixon, T. J. and Ebrary, I. (2011) Urban regeneration & social sustainability: Best practice from European cities, Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell. Davies, A.R., Edwards, F., Marovelli, B., Morrow, O., Rut, M. and Weymes, M. (2017) Making visible: Interrogating the performance of food sharing across 100 urban areas. Geoforum, 86, 136–149. DiSalvo, C., Louw, M., Holstius, D., Nourbakhsh, I. and Akin, A. (2012) Toward a public rhetoric through participatory design: Critical engagements and creative expression in the neighbourhood networks project. Design Issues, 28(3), 48–61.

256  Laura Alvarez Dolan, P. (2012), Travelling through social support and youth civic action on a journey towards resilience, In Ungar, M. (Ed.) The social ecology of resilience: a handbook of theory and practice, New York: Springer, 357–366. Doyle, R. and Davies, A.R. (2013) Towards sustainable household consumption: Exploring a practice oriented, participatory backcasting approach for sustainable home heating practices in Ireland. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 260–271. Elkington, J. (2002) Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business, Oxford: Capstone. Ferragina, E. (2012) Social capital in Europe: A comparative regional analysis, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Gunter, V. and Kroll-Smith, S. (2007) Volatile places: A sociology of communities and environmental controversies, London: Pine Forge Press. Halpern, D. (2005) Social capital, Cambridge: Polity Press. Hester, R.T. (2006) Design for ecological democracy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Holmes, H. and Hall, S.M. (eds.) (2020) Mundane methods: Innovative ways to research the everyday, Manchester: Manchester University Press. Luca, N., Smith, M., Hibbert, S. and Doherty, B. (2019) House of Lords select committee submission for food, poverty and the environment- how to make a healthy, sustainable diet accessible and affordable for everyone?, Written evidence (FPO0032), http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence. svc/evidencedocument/food-poverty-health-and-environment-committee/foodpoverty-health-and-the-environment/written/105296.html on 24.4.20 [accessed on 24 April 2020]. Maahsen-Milan (2013) International conference on harmonisation between nature and architecture, In Brebbia, C.A. (Ed.) Eco-architecture IV: Harmonisation between architecture and nature, Southampton: WIT Press, 431–441. Mathie, A. and Cunningham, G. (2003) From clients to citizens: Asset-based community development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice, 13(5), 474–486. National Planning Policy Framework (2012), https://webarchive.nationalarchives. gov.uk/20180608095821/; https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nationalplanning-policy-framework--2 [accessed 3 June 2020]. Nottingham City Council Carbon Neutral Plan 2028 (n.d.), https://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/cn2028#:~:text=The%20draft%20Carbon%20Neutral%20Action,carbon%2Dneutral%20Nottingham%20by%202028.&text=The%20document%20 is%20broken%20down,Carbon%20Reduction%20Measures [accessed 3 June 2020]. Nottingham Co-PLACE (n.d.), https://www.co-place.org [accessed 3 June 2020]. Nottingham Design Quality Framework (2020), https://www.dqfnottingham.org.uk [accessed 3 June 2020]. Putnam, R.D. (1995) Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, January, 65–78. Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (2006) Introduction. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds.) The Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1–10. Rowson, J., Broome, S. and Jones, A. (2010) Connected communities: How social networks power and sustain the Big Society. London: RSA. Tallon, A. (2013) Urban regeneration in the UK, Abingdon: Routledge.

Section IV

Assessing and measuring social value In this fourth section, we discuss assessing and measuring social value. We close the loop to the beginning of the book, Chapter 1, where we first observed the problematic polarisation trend that is splitting the field along two contrasting arguments: a focus on measuring added value vis-à-vis doing the right thing. We acknowledge the importance of assessing and measuring social value. At the same time, we highlight that social value is about co-creating value and achieving social impact, and both the process and outcomes may be difficult to measure in numerical form. In Chapter 14, we first use a deontological perspective on ethics to make the case for doing the right thing. We then discuss the difficulties with using accounting principles for measuring social value. In Chapter 15, we present an outline introduction to selected tools and methods to demonstrate the many different ways one might approach the assessment and measurement of social value. Chapter 16, the conclusion, brings this book to a close by reinforcing the call to action. We invite you to critically reflect upon your ethics and principles, and how they influence your professional practice and views on assessing and measuring social value.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-17

14 Principles and good practice in assessing and measuring social value Ani Raiden and Andrew King

In this chapter, we discuss the principles and good practice in assessing and measuring social value and demonstrate how different ways of approaching this task can help in reporting on the achievement of the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Assessing and measuring social value is important because it helps in making explicit and communicating social value-related activity and outcomes, which, in turn, can help those tendering for work. Importantly, it also helps produce clear and convincing evidence to substantiate the case for social value (Sacks, 2002: 3). The world of work is largely metrics-driven, and social value is a relatively new aspect of managing organisations in the built environment. In this context, we recognise that monetised ways of assessing and measuring social value attract significant attention at the moment. It is important to remain cognisant, however, that social value is about co-creating value and achieving social impact, and both the process and outcomes may be difficult to measure in numerical form (as we discuss in Chapter 2).

We first outline the seven principles of social value, which guide our discussion of assessment and measurement. We then consider the mixed-methods approach to assessing and measuring social value, before discussing numerical cost-benefit analysis. We relate to the relevant key stakeholders, selected tools, focus, ethics and principles, and consider examples of different organisational policy and practices that are relevant to assessing and measuring social value (as shown in Table 14.1). Table 14.1 draws attention to the underlying rationale and reasons for using a particular approach to assessment or measurement by highlighting their respective conceptual connections. The key stakeholders are at the centre of the process, with the focus and basic principles underpinning each approach, as well as examples of relevant tools and organisational practices. We discuss each aspect, in turn, below, after consideration of the key principles of assessing and measuring social value. Much of the current practice, research, and academic literature on social value measurement focuses on cost-benefit analysis (Fujiwara and Dass, 2020). This type of analysis utilises financial proxies to represent the value of social impact. We highlight the value of a more comprehensive and flexible mixed-methods assessment,

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-18

260  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Table 14.1  Assessing and measuring social value – key stakeholders, tools, ethics and principles, and organisational practice Mixed-methods assessment

Numerical measurement

Key stakeholders

Community and organisation

Example tools used in assessing and measuring social value Focus

•

Decision-makers/ organisation • Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) • Cost-benefit analysis • TOMs framework

Ethics and principles Example of organisational policy/practice on social value typically reported on

Deontology (nonconsequentialist ethics) • Managing diversity and inclusion • Organisational governance • Community engagement • Social Procurement • Training and development

•

Social Value Maturity Framework Social Impact Assessment (SIA)

Doing the right thing

Measuring outputs and outcomes Accounting principles, monetary terms • Equality of opportunity • School visits • Litter picking • Face painting • Supporting workers’ charitable activities

which involves gathering qualitative and quantitative data, and forward an argument for good practice based on doing the right thing. We focus on the ‘deontological school of thought in ethics’ and ‘accounting principles’ in our discussion, as these offer useful frames for thinking about assessing and measuring social value from an institutional perspective. In Chapter 2, we identify differences in social value orientation (individuals’ value systems and motivations) as one of the major drivers and challenges for considering, creating, and delivering social value. The deontological perspective on ethics helps us to illuminate how an organisation can develop a system of values, policy, and practice that does not rely on a person-centred view (Fisher et al., 2013 provide helpful discussion of the person-centred view).

Principles of social value There are seven principles of social value: • • •

Identify and involve stakeholders and identify and document the objectives of the social value assessment, what gets measured, and how this is measured Understand what changes by defining the boundaries for the assessment, and connecting outcomes with the social value activities, construction project(s), and/or constructed assets Value the outcomes that matter and involve key stakeholders in decision-making and prioritising the relative importance of different outcomes

Principles and good practice  261 • • • •

Collect relevant data, information, and knowledge to evidence a true and fair picture Assess and measure the impact and validate value: only claim what you are responsible for creating, do not over-claim Be transparent: report both positive and negative changes, reveal all data sources and limitations, and engage with stakeholders Report outcomes, seek to verify and benchmark: learn from past examples and recommend future improvements.

These seven principles have support from practitioners (for example Clifford, 2014; Social Value UK, 2020) and literature in this area (Raiden et al., 2019; Dobson et al., 2020; Fujiwara and Dass, 2020: 11), with the rationale that by applying these principles consistently, it is possible to create a valid, reliable, and credible account of social value that can stand up to scrutiny. The process of assessing and measuring social value helps in reporting on the achievement of many SDGs. Directly, the principles of social value help ensure a partnership approach (SDG 17) and transparency in responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11), reduced inequalities (SDG 10), and decent work and economic growth (SDG 8). Reporting on the achievement of many other SDGs is dependent upon local context.

Doing the right thing: a mixed-methods approach to assessing and measuring social value Using mixed methods in assessing and measuring social value refers to the processes of collecting different types of data, both qualitative and quantitative, and employing a variety of techniques in analysing that data. There are a number of resources that can help in developing a detailed understanding and knowledge of these research skills and methods (see, for example, Knight and Ruddock, 2008). We provide an insight into what this type of assessment and measurement framework can offer, and the rationale for mixed-methods assessment in social value. In Chapter 15, we introduce a range of tools that offer a useful starting point for anyone embarking on the journey of assessing and measuring social value for the first time, including the Social Value Maturity Framework, Social Impact Assessment (SIA), and the TOMs framework. Mixed-methods assessment (or multi-method assessment as it is sometimes called) is an inclusive and comprehensive way of assessing and measuring social value. It is particularly well suited to assessing social value where the context or circumstances are complex. In research, mixed methods are

262  Ani Raiden and Andrew King increasingly popular as they can offer greater depth and answers to nuanced ‘why and how’ questions as well as the certitude of metrics, coverage of large sample sizes, and affirmative results. In short, mixed methods can offer the best of both worlds. The first of the seven principles of social value is to identify and involve stakeholders. We also begin this book by emphasising the importance of engaging with stakeholders (see Chapter 3). It is our view that, it is society that dictates social value, not experts, and the creation of social value must be built on an intimate understanding of what value means to those communities. (Raiden et al., 2019) This view is supported by much good practice. For example, Doloi (2018) argues that the needs and requirements of the community should be at the core in planning for infrastructure projects. Therefore, it is important to reach out and identify the key stakeholders’ perceptions of value and the kind of change that may benefit them. It is often difficult to do this by any other means than open conversations or other ways of gathering qualitative data, as we show in Chapters 9, 11–13. Mixed-methods assessment allows for understanding what is ‘the right thing to do’, what the needs of the community are, and what kinds of social value activities, interventions, or programmes of change will make the biggest impact. Yet, mixed-methods assessment does not focus attention solely on items with the largest financial proxy value; it also gives voice to social value in ways that cannot be measured in numerical terms but that may be showcased using case studies or other qualitative approaches. Let us develop this via an example: A large construction contractor has a multi-million-pound commercial development project that is located within a deprived community with high unemployment and low engagement in education and training. The contractor offers an apprenticeship programme over four years that has places to support 14 young people into jobs in the industry. This intervention is high value in both monetary and non-monetary terms, in that the training and employment opportunities potentially provide people with the means to support themselves financially (paid training and employment) and this will reduce their reliance on the welfare system. Arguably, it is equally important that the training and employment offers the young people structure, meaning and purpose in life, increases the quality of their lives, potentially raises the aspirations of other young people in the same community and also helps raise the profile of the employer (and industry/sector) to give a few examples of the kinds of things that cannot easily be measured in numerical form. These are all significant social value outcomes, albeit some are very difficult to measure accurately in numerical terms.

Principles and good practice  263 Furthermore, let us consider that it may well be the case that 13 of those young people are quite keen to advance and get onto the career ladder anyway, since within all communities there are high-achievers as well as those with less well-defined interests. The contractor simply selects the best candidates from the area for the apprenticeships, and hence gains many well-performing and high potential workers at a low cost. In this case, the ‘true social value’ that will be delivered only includes engaging that one young person whose background and circumstances were complex and with whom the contractor needed to spend much more time and resources than any of the other 13. The costs and risk involved were greater, yet, arguably, so was the social value impact. In such a situation, the contractor and the relevant personnel managing the apprenticeship scheme and assessing and measuring social value, ideally in consultation with the local community, are faced with a question: We develop this example further by considering the ethical dimensions below. What we wish to highlight here is that there is a need to look beyond the headline figures in assessing and measuring social value. There is a danger of misrepresentation and over/under-valuing impact. Mixed-methods What matters most? …given that in any project and social value initiative, a wide range of changes might occur, and some will be more important than others and not all can be included in social value assessments for practical reasons.

assessment helps reveal both the headline figures and the nuanced detail. Financial proxies and other numerical indicators should only be used if they add value in the key stakeholders’ viewpoint (Clifford, 2014). Mixed-methods social value assessment at best provides easily readable and understandable information that supports real-time decision-making about the use of resources to improve social impact. It ought to help in doing the right thing. This logic aligns with the deontological school of thought in ethics. Deontology is a normative, duty-based approach to ethics where the morality of an action is assessed on whether the action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules (rather than on the basis of the consequences of the action). Hence, it is sometimes called a non-consequentialist approach to ethics. Deontological duty-based ethics tend to focus on giving equal respect to all human beings, which provides the basis for human rights. They force due regard to be given to the interests of a single person even when those may be at odds with the interests of a larger group.

264  Ani Raiden and Andrew King The deontological approach also deals with the intentions and motives underlying action, which fits with ordinary thinking about ethical issues. Most people pay attention to whether a person’s act was carried out with ‘good’ or ‘bad’ intentions. In light of these rules, to develop the abovementioned example about the contractor operating an apprenticeship scheme within a deprived area, the deontological perspective would suggest that every apprentice matters, however ‘needy’ or otherwise they may be, as long as the contractor’s scheme was managed and operated with good intentions and they did not recruit within that community with a view of gaining cheap labour, or to offer opportunities to select candidates deliberately to the detriment of others. The deontological perspective also suggests that the greater costs and risk involved with engaging that one young person, whose background and circumstances were complex and with whom the contractor needed to spend much more time and resources than any of the other 13, are justified – even where this may mean that there are less resources available to support the others. As is evident here, sometimes conflict arises between different duties or rules: how can all the 14 apprentices matter, equally, while at the same time due regard be given to each one of them individually? In organisational decision-making, help in guiding social value assessment and measurement can be gained by considering Social Value Principle 5: only measure what you are responsible for, and do not over-claim. Arguably, the fact that the 13 high-achieving apprentices were quite keen to advance and get onto the career ladder anyway counts as a counterfactual: deadweight (what would have happened anyway); as such, the contractor ought not count them as social value. At the very least, if the contractor has good intentions and motives that underpin their actions, they should only count as high-impact social value the one young person whose background and circumstances were complex, and with whom the contractor needed to spend much more time and resources than any of the other 13. Sometimes, this principle is problematic however! In Chapters 1, 2, and 10, we recognise and discuss the challenges associated with diligent application of ‘Social Value Principle 5: only measure what you are responsible for, and do not over-claim’, specifically with regard to the implications for valued-based organisations whose way of doing business exemplifies social value good practice. Here we draw on three specific deontological theories of ethics that allow us to develop the argument for using mixed-methods approaches in assessing and measuring social value and deciding what matters most: • • •

Kantian duty and principle Rawls’ justice as fairness The ‘do no harm’ maxim.

In terms of duty and principle, the German Philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that our actions must be guided by universalist

Principles and good practice  265 principles, without consideration of context or consequence. He termed this objective the categorical imperative and deemed it a rationally necessary unconditional principle that must be obeyed without exception. This is the highest order of moral behaviour, a supreme principle. Kant identified that a good will satisfies this test, and this forms the basis for thinking about the intentions and motives underlying action within deontological ethics. A good will is not contextual, nor dependent on the consequences. As such, good will is shared because it is the moral law, the right thing to do, a duty. Also, Kant argues that a good will is shared because such a moral law applies to everyone, and this gives rise to the principle: equal respect to all human beings, with due regard being given to the interests of a single person, even when it may be at odds with the interests of a larger group. The saying ‘do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ is associated with Kantian ethics. For Kant, thinking about the actions we take needs to be carried out in a serious and philosophically rigorous manner, so that we can behave in a way that satisfies the test of the categorical imperative, doing the right thing simply because it is the right thing to do. By this logic, considering, creating, and delivering social value is the right thing to do, regardless of the consequences. John Rawls, an American philosopher (1921–2002), developed the justice as fairness theory, which advances the equal respect to all human beings deontological principle. Rawls argued that there are three conditions that will make a universal system of fairness possible: first, rational people can arrive at a contractual agreement of sorts about how resources are to be distributed. This agreement was not intended to reflect present reality, but rather a desired state of affairs among people in the community. Second, a veil of ignorance (imagining that people have no identity regarding age, sex, ethnicity, education, income, physical attractiveness, or other characteristics) is required to reduce their bias and self-interest in decision-making. And finally, unanimity of acceptance is needed, whereby all must agree to the contract before the system can be put into practice. Rawls’ aim was to provide a minimum guarantee of rights and liberties for everyone, but with the provision to maximise the welfare of the most disadvantaged persons. The theory was built on the belief that the proper place for fairness is above utility and the bottom line. Justice as fairness has distinct appeal when applied in practice: fairness is a value that is cross-cultural, embraced by different social groups, and understood by nearly everyone, albeit an interpretation of what is fair varies, for example, by an individual’s social value orientation (see Chapter 2). The terminology and discussion relating to justice and fairness are accessible and can be connected to organisational policy and practice on: • • •

Managing diversity and inclusion Organisational governance Community engagement

266  Ani Raiden and Andrew King • •

Social Procurement Training and development.

We discuss these issues in detail elsewhere in this book (see Chapters 4–6 and 9). In terms of doing the right thing, and assessing and measuring social value, organisations must critically reflect upon their policy and practice internally, as well as in conjunction with external stakeholders in the community, consider the fairness of their policies and practices by asking:

Are there provisions to maximise the welfare of the most disadvantaged persons?

Reporting on the organisational activity, policy, and practice in place to maximise the welfare of the most disadvantaged persons can help in reporting on the achievement of the following SDGs: 1 No poverty, 2 Zero hunger, 3 Good health and well-being, 4 Quality education, 5 Gender equality, 8 Decent work and economic growth, and 10 Reduced inequalities (the details are dependent on the specific local circumstances). Kantian duty and principle-based ethics, and Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness, both highlight the ethical importance of not privileging oneself. In terms of social value orientation, they advocate the prosocial stance (see Chapter 2). A good will and fairness should take primary importance since these are the highest order of moral behaviour within the deontological school of thought in ethics. The default position, the lowest point within deontological ethics, is called ‘do no harm’, and this should only be used in the absence of any higher imperative. It states that if one cannot act well, one should at least avoid acting badly. Focus is on prevention of harm rather than doing good; action must be taken to limit any likely causes of harm. This is most commonly expressed via organisational risk management strategy and practice, workplace health and safety measures, and consideration of the environmental impacts of projects and programmes of work. Assessment and measurement of social value should consider the likely risks an activity or initiative may have. Reporting on organisational activity, policy, and practice related to the environmental impact of projects or programmes of work, for example,

Principles and good practice  267 through choice of materials, can help in reporting on the achievement of the SDGs 7 affordable and clean energy, and 13 climate action (the details are dependent on the specific local circumstances). In summary, the deontological approach emphasises the value of doing the right thing regardless of the consequences. It can offer certainty and useful boundaries in complex circumstances and contexts where an organisation wishes to direct specific action, and/or where it may be difficult to see what the outcome or consequences of action may be. These boundaries and rules can be articulated in organisational strategy and policy documentation (for example, employee handbooks, manuals, and interand intranet sites), and they are also often communicated implicitly through organisational values, culture, managerial action (leading by example), and everyday practice in the workplace. Assessing and measuring social value using mixed methods is an inclusive and comprehensive way of evaluating a broad range of evidence on organisational activity.

Measuring social value using accounting principles Where deontological (non-consequentialist) ethics are focused on doing the right thing, as we discuss above, currently the most prominent approach to measuring social value uses accounting principles, monetary values, and other numerical forms to measure the outputs and outcomes of social value activities. Cost-benefit analysis is the principal method of measuring social value that employs monetary valuation (Fujiwara, 2014), although there are many other methods, tools, and models available, for example, Social Return on Investment (SROI), cost-utility analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and multi-criteria analysis. We present an outline introduction to selected tools in Chapter 15, and here we consider what the application of this approach means in practice for doing social value. Monetary measurement of social value is commonly undertaken for the benefit of an organisation or others’ in decision-making roles that are connected to the organisation in some way, for example, potential clients looking at tender documentation. In addition, funders who want to direct their money to the most effective projects, policy makers, and government officials who have to account for their decisions and spending, and organisations throughout the supply chain which need to demonstrate their impact to funders, partners, and/or beneficiaries, all have an interest in measuring social value. Hence, although the community is a key stakeholder in social value, the key stakeholders in measuring social value tend to be decision-makers, and this has important implications on the decisions about what gets measured, and how they are measured, valued, and reported.

268  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Usually, there are two distinct things that tend to be measured: 1 2

Outputs: the activities undertaken by an organisation, which are usually listed in an action plan or a set of objectives, for example, the number of apprenticeships/supported jobs within a scheme Outcomes: the long-term observed effects of the outputs, which are often the real changes that organisations are trying to make.

The former, outputs, are less subjective and thus more easily accounted for since measuring outputs focuses on reporting the activities that an organisation has undertaken or completed. The Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time Bound (SMART) or Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time Bound, Evaluated, and Reviewed (SMARTER) frameworks often guide action and measurement of project performance, regeneration, economic development, and funding initiatives (see Chapter 8). In brief, with reference to the example we develop above, the contractor with 14 apprentices has offered 14 more opportunities for training and employment that were available within a deprived community with high unemployment and low engagement in education and training (before their multi-million-pound commercial development project started). This is a simple articulation of social value, one that most will agree has been a useful and SMART activity. Many public sector Frameworks, for example, will ask for this kind of information. However, the number does not provide any relational indication of the value created, and one might ask questions about: • • • • •

The number of apprentices (given that it was a multi-million-pound commercial development project): was 14 the maximum possible number or the minimum required by the client, for example? The reach of the organisation’s apprenticeship scheme (how were the trainees recruited and selected) The cost of the scheme The longevity of the post-apprenticeship jobs The nature and scale of other social value activities.

Outcomes are more difficult to measure accurately. They are often subjective and longitudinal. Specific tools and frameworks (such as the national TOMs; see Chapter 15) include metrics, which are useful for comparing likefor-like, but the proxies are often general and must be adjusted to reflect the local conditions of a project or programme of works. It can be challenging to bring different stakeholders together to agree proxies for measuring social value across a framework, and there may not be an easy agreement. Also, it can be difficult to take into account the likely complex connections between wider societal trends, organisational policy and practice, project

Principles and good practice  269 and local community context, and intersectionality in terms of individuals’ personal and professional background and circumstances at work and outside of work (see Chapter 4). Much current practice on measuring social value outcomes draws on accounting principles: the net result of costs and benefits. Returning back to the example of a contractor with their apprenticeship scheme, a simple calculation of social value may thus take the form of adding up the benefits that the apprenticeship scheme has produced (for example, paid employment and less demand for welfare support) and taking away the costs of running the scheme. However, this would not be sufficient for measuring the outcomes, since important considerations, such as improving the image of the organisation/industry, and growing aspirations for meaningful employment within a community, would be omitted. Including these kinds of outcomes in the analysis requires sophisticated statistics, mathematics, and econometrics. Indeed, social value measurement is a highly technical field and requires good understanding in economics, mathematics, statistical analysis, ethics, survey design and data collection. (Fujiwara and Dass, 2020: 4) Hence, numerical measurement of social value often requires specialist support or external consultancy input. Organisations commonly report on the following social value-related policy and activities: equality of opportunity, school visits, litter picking, face painting, and supporting workers’ charitable activities. These are mostly output measures, such as the number of people employed who belong to recognised minority or vulnerable groups; number of school visits, litter picking, face painting events, and the total sum raised in support of, or in conjunction with, workers’ charitable activities. However, the real value would be best expressed through measurement and reporting of the outcomes of these activities, such as metrics that showcase enhanced employee engagement and perceptions of procedural fairness, improved industry/sector image, and/or cleaner natural and built environment. We introduce a selection of tools in Chapter 15 that help with measuring outcomes as well as outputs. Accurately measuring outputs and outcomes can help in reporting on the achievement of many SDGs, such as those directly or indirectly relating to training and employment (for example, 1–5, 8, 10) or environment (for example, 6, 7, 11–15) (the details are dependent on the specific local circumstances). In summary, in this chapter, we have considered doing the right thing and showcasing this through the use of a mixed-methods approach to assessing and measuring social value. We also briefly explored the limitations of

270  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Figure 14.1 Assessing and measuring social value.

relying on accounting principles and cost-benefit analysis as the principal method for measuring social value. Although the two appear to be in tension with each other, at best, a balance between the two can be achieved in organisational practice where social value assessment and measurement go hand in hand with value-driven business models, strengthening one another to help shape action. We acknowledge that using accounting principles in the measurement of social value is much more commonplace at present than the use of mixed-methods assessment of social value. An indirect consequence of this is the trend for chasing key performance indicators (KPIs) in order to demonstrate how one has outperformed one’s peers, rather than maintaining focus on lasting benefits and value, and doing the right thing. Thus, we recommend a holistic consideration of social value assessment and measurement that engages stakeholders, encourages doing the right thing, uses mixed-methods assessment, and measures outcomes as well as outputs (see Figure 14.1). There are many different methods and tools that can be used to assess and measure social value. We showcase the range and diversity of methods and tools available in this area that are currently popular in Table 14.2 overleaf (developed after Watts et al., 2019: 58). Together with an outline of their key characteristics, we present a brief summary of the advantages and disadvantages associated with these tools. Further information about selected tools is included in Chapter 15.

$4,000 per annum

Free and subscription

GIIRS

Global Reporting Initiative (GRP)

Helps organisations understand and communicate their impact upon society and the environment by introducing expected reported standards.

A tool designed to assist investors in understanding and measuring the impact the organisations they invest in have upon numerous stakeholders. Assigns a score (and not a monetary metric).

An assessment and measurement in monetary terms of the positive and negative outcomes (benefits and costs) of a project and their impacts on people’s quality of life. Membership A global initiative improving subscription. transparency and Tools and accountability in public resources free infrastructure, via multistakeholder working, disclosure, assurance and social accountability.

CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative

In-house resource & expertise required

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)

Description

Cost

Title

any government department or agency at a national/global level

(Continued)

• Extensively used • Doesn’t focus on impact • Focuses upon clear measurement communication and • Offers guidance on areas specifically how sustainability to measure but not on is communicated how to measure them • Can be used internationally • The metrics are numerous and broad and so can be difficult to compare

• Bank of resources and research free to use • Aimed at investors only • Analyses an organisation’s impact on workers, community • Assesses the impact and the environment organisations have • Allows results to be generally only recorded, measured and • Scores based on viewed in graph form perception of fund • An easy to understand medal/ managers and may not be star rating easily understood

quantitative and qualitative data, including environmental and social impact

Disadvantages

• Public sector preferred best • Assessment and practice measurement in monetary • Comprehensive and terms only customisable • Very resource intensive • Engages stakeholders • Long history in research and policy making • An independent review of the • Not organisation disclosed data specific, only relevant • An assessment of to country and

Advantages

Table14.2   An outline summary of selected tools and methods for assessing and measuring social value

Principles and good practice  271

£4,000 first A tool that helps year. organisations calculate £2,000 annually the financial impact their thereafter spending has on local economies and how this spending then circulates within the economy.

Free for information

Local Multiplier 3 (LM3)

ONS Wellbeing Survey

A Government recognised and backed survey that identifies and measures societal and personal wellbeing across several categories, including life satisfaction, happiness, and anxiety.

A framework of guidance • and metrics which allows investors to track social and • environmental ‘outputs’ of their investments as well as the financial returns.

Free and subscription

•

•

•

•

• • • •

Highly relevant to many stakeholders

be identified Results in easy to read graphs

Measure impact upon individuals Allows long-term trends to

Easy to use Increasingly well known Easy to express impact A good tool for financial measurement of spending

Offers validation as an independent party Uses existing standardised metrics Allows the user to select the metrics used

compare investments

•

•

Measures across health, wealth, earth, equality, and trust Results in a graph to

•

Advantages

IRIS

Description A tool for investors to identify the positive human impacts that arise from investments. Used quantitative measures of performance, which are assigned by HIP.

Cost

Human Impact Starts from and Profit (HIP) $500 per Scorecard month

Title

Table 14.2  (Continued)

Fails to understand the more nuanced and non-financial impacts organisations’ actions can have on individuals

•

•

•

•

•

•

Requires adaptation for organisational use

information only

Survey is too detailed to deploy and assess regularly, time consuming to complete No ‘tool’ to use, for

‘deeper’ impacts

No consideration on identifying and measuring impacts Reduces impacts to monetary metrics Doesn’t measure the

different formats •

•

Only really measures ‘outputs’ All outputs are in

Focused on how organisations behave and not how individuals may be impacted The ‘score’ is a number/ percentage which can be hard to understand

•

•

•

Disadvantages

272  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Free

Free and subscription

Free and subscription

Free and portfolio account pricing

Social Impact Assessment (SIA)

Social Return on Investment (SROI)

Social Value & Procurement Tool Bank

Social Value SelfAssessment Tool

A tool bank with guidance and processes for Housing Providers and their bidders to help them engage with social value in a legally compliant manner. A tool to help users judge how well they are measuring and reporting social value. Provides guidance, support and advice on how improve measuring and assessing social value delivery.

A framework method of quantifying and measuring environmental and social value. It results in a financial figure of social value created and a ration of how this compares to every £1 spent.

A method of identifying and assessing any social concerns (including areas for positive enhancement and reducing negative impacts).

Comprehensive support and resources

•

involvement

Promotes stakeholder •

understand metrics/graph

Customisable survey Results in easy to

• •

• • •

• •

•

Takes into account the original investment Comprehensive tool bank Sector specific Associated web-based tools, for example, Community Insight and Value Insight

•

•

•

Widely recognised, • comprehensive tool Results in easy to understand metrics and graph • • Promotes stakeholder

•

•

•

involvement

Impacts can be selected to suit project needs

project commences

•

•

Good framework to adopt to identify what areas can be impacted during projects Used proactively before a

•

(Continued)

Survey questions generic Focus on measuring and reporting, risk steering attention away from practice

Specific to housing (albeit the ‘social value bank’ list of social values is transferable to other contexts)

Monetises all impacts, even if they are not easily monetised Very resource intensive Broad metrics, risk ignoring deeper impacts and overlook impacts on individuals

Only offers guidance on identification and not measurement Not suitable to provide detailed measurement assistance of how practices may have an impact on individuals

Principles and good practice  273

Free

TOMs framework

Open source, MS Excel based TOM (Theme/Outcome/ Measures) framework method for quantifying and measuring and reporting environmental and social value. Uses financial proxies for many measures and results in monetised figures of social value.

Membership level subscription

Social Value Portal (SVP)

•

•

•

• •

•

• •

•

•

• • •

A guide for infrastructure organisations and/or project teams to reflect on their maturity in terms of embedding social value and maximising positive social impact through their business operations. An online tool that allows organisations to measure their added social value. Uses and results in both financial and non-financial data. Assigns KPIs to goals of stakeholder organisations. Linked to the TOM (Theme/Outcome/ Measures) Framework.

Free

A comprehensive tool, widely recognised Clear guidance Results in easy to understand metrics Various plug-ins allow customisation Promotes stakeholder involvement Impacts can be selected and prioritised

A logical approach to measuring impacts Attempts to identify metrics for individuals Easy to use and understand Offers validation as an independent third party

•

•

• •

•

•

• •

Results are financial Possibly reduces impact by assigning a monetary value Monetary value can be easily manipulated Requires in-house resource to learn and use the tool

Similar to IRIS Confuses inputs, outputs and impacts Monetary value can be easily manipulated Non-monetary outputs include quotes and case studies which can’t be easily compared

Generic guide, no specific ways/guidance on assessing and measuring social value

Results are financial Subscription only service

Disadvantages

Comprehensive, • geographically sensitive • Real-time tracking of performance Accounts for both positive and negative impacts to provide a realistic picture • Flexible checklist for actions Benchmarking aid Suggestions for specific tools to use in combination with the framework

Advantages

Social Value Maturity Framework

Description A web-based portal providing • real-time tracking and monetisation of social value • created from procurement and operational activity. •

Cost

Social Value Bank Subscription (SVB)

Title

Table1 4.2   (Continued)

274  Ani Raiden and Andrew King

Principles and good practice  275 Please note: the methods and tools are listed in the table in alphabetical order by title, not in any order of preference or importance. The SDG Action Manager is an impact management tool that enables businesses to take meaningful action to meet the SDGs. Developed by B Lab and the United Nations Global Compact, it focuses on self-assessment and benchmarking to enable improvement. For further information, see https://www.unglobalcompact.org/take-action/sdg-action-manager Fujiwara (2014) and Fujiwara and Dass (2020) offer informative comparisons of various ways of measuring social impact in numerical terms. A further, comprehensive review of the various methods and generic tools that fall within the broader category of SIA is provided in Watson and Whitley (2017: 877–878), and a summary of selected frameworks and measuring and reporting tools relevant to infrastructure projects is provided by Dobson et al. (2020: 44–54).

Chapter summary We began this chapter with an outline of the seven principles of social value, and then discussed doing the right thing (deontological ethics) and the mixed-methods approach to assessing and measuring social value, before considering the measurement of social value using accounting principles. This chapter culminates in a summary table that lists a range of tools and methods currently available and in use for the assessment and measurement of social value. This leads us to the next chapter where we present an outline introduction to selected examples.

References Clifford, J. (2014) Proposed approaches to social impact measurement in European Commission legislation and in practice relating to EuSEFs and the EaSI, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, ISBN: 978-9-279-38888-0, DOI: 10.2767/28855. Dobson, J., Behar, C., Ramsden, C., Crudgington, A. and Heulin, C-A. (2020) Maximising social value from infrastructure projects, London: Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE) usefulprojects, https://usefulprojects.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Maximising_social_value_from_infrastructure_projects_v1.1.pdf [accessed 12 November 2020]. Doloi, H. (2018) Community-centric model for evaluating social value in projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(05). DOI: 10.1061/1943-7862.0001473 Fisher, C.M., Lovell, A. and Valero-Silva, N. (2013) Business ethics and values: Individual, corporate and international perspectives (4th ed.), Harlow: Pearson. Fujiwara, D. (2014) A short guide to social impact measurement, London: Simetrica. Fujiwara, D. and Dass, D. (2020) Measuring social value in infrastructure projects: Insights from the public sector, London: The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS).

276  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Knight, A. and Ruddock, L. (2008) Advanced research methods in the built environment, Oxford: Blackwell. Raiden, A.B., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (2019) Social value in construction, Abingdon: Taylor and Francis, ISBN: 978-1-138-29509-4. Sacks, J. (2002) The money trail, measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3, London: New Economics Foundation and The Countryside Agency, https://nefconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TheMoneyTrail.pdf [accessed 3 May 2021]. Social Value UK (2020) What are the principles of social value? Liverpool: Social Value UK, http://www.socialvalueuk.org/what-is-socialvalue/theprinciples-ofsocial-value/ [accessed 21 December 2020]. Watson, K.J. and Whitley, T. (2017) Applying social return on investment to the built environment. Building Research & Information, 45(08), 875–891. Watts, G., Dainty, A. and Fernie, S. (2019) Measuring social value in UK construction. InGorse, C. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds.) Proceedings 35th annual ARCOM conference, 2–4 September, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 54–63.

15 Selected tools for assessing and measuring social value Ani Raiden and Andrew King

In this chapter, we build on the discussion of the two different approaches to assessing and measuring social value in Chapter 14. We review a range of frameworks, models, and tools that demonstrate the many and varied ways of assessing and measuring social value. We first introduce the ICE usefulprojects Social Value Maturity Framework since this includes a clear and visual overview of social value throughout a project lifecycle, from strategic brief, through design, construction, and use, before ending with the decommissioning stage.

We then present an outline introduction to three tools that use mixed methods, incorporating qualitative and quantitative data, as we advocate that this type of analysis offers the most comprehensive and flexible way forward for social value assessment. Research shows that practitioners support this view: a large majority of industry-based research participants that the ICE usefulprojects team and the Social Value Portal consulted indicate that both quality and quantitative assessment of social value are necessary for good practice (Dobson et al, 2020; The Social Value Portal, 2020). The three mixed-methods tools are CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, Human Impact and Profit Scorecard (HIP), and Social Impact Assessment (SIA). We then discuss four different methods of measuring social value using quantitative data. These are Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), Local Multiplier 3 (LM3), Social Return on Investment (SROI), and the TOMs Framework. We remind readers of the table presented at the start of Chapter 14 (Table 14.1). This draws attention to the underlying rationale and reasons for using a specific tool. As such, it highlights the conceptual connections with the type of assessment and measurement an organisation might be thinking of engaging with, the key stakeholders central to the process, the focus, ethics, and basic principles underpinning that approach, and selected organisational practices relevant to assessing and measuring social value in a particular way.

DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-19

278  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Each organisation must make an informed decision about what specific tools and methods will offer the most beneficial package for them, and what suits the level of skill and resource available, whether in-house or through an external consultancy. We highlight the Social Value Maturity Framework, SIA, and the TOMs Framework as universally helpful starting points for considering, assessing, and measuring social value. They offer a straightforward approach at minimal or no cost that practitioners can readily apply in organisations and for specific projects, be that in their current work (as a tool to analyse where they are now and looking back to completed work) or in planning for the future.

Social Value Maturity Framework The ICE usefulprojects’ Social Value Maturity Framework (Dobson et al, 2020: 17) offers a guide for considering, creating, and delivering social value throughout the eight lifecycle phases of a project: • • • • • • • •

Strategic Brief Options Selection & Investment case Procurement of Design & Delivery Teams Design Development Planning Approvals Construction Operation Decommissioning.

These eight phases of a project are shown alongside three different aspects to considering social value in infrastructure projects (see Figure 15.1): • • •

‘What you build’ ‘How you build’ ‘How you operate’.

Figure 15.1 The Social Value Maturity Framework (after Dobson et al, 2020: 51).

Selected tools  279 The framework was developed in response to calls for an industry best practice model that was specific to the infrastructure sector, and it is intended to inspire ambition and creativity in approaches to creating and delivering social value. In particular, the framework seeks to highlight that ‘much more work needs to be undertaken in early stage infrastructure planning to understand community needs and identify opportunities to create social benefits’ (ibid: ii). Table 15.1 Summary information – The Social Value Maturity Framework Key information

Advantages

A guide for infrastructure Flexible checklist for organisations and/or actions project teams to reflect on Benchmarking aid their maturity in terms of Suggestions for specific embedding social value and tools to use in maximising positive social combination with the impact through their business framework operations.

Disadvantages Generic guide, no specific ways/ guidance on assessing and measuring social value

The report by Dobson et al (2020) details guidance for practitioners on three levels: basic, best, and pioneering in relation to each aspect (‘what you build’, ‘how you build’, and ‘how you operate’). We summarise the key points from their report below. One of the important contributions that the Social Value Maturity Framework makes is the explicit and visible consideration of social value from the very outset of a project in terms of developing a strategic brief in which a client describes the requirements and outcomes to be achieved. This ought to be based on a local needs analysis (for example, using SIA as discussed below), be ambitious and embedded, and ideally identify how social value will be delivered in what is built, how it is designed and built, and how it will be operated. What you build In terms of options selection and investment case, the Social Value Maturity Framework calls for joined up thinking and strategic infrastructure planning – making decisions to invest in the right projects – and an open-minded approach to exploring a broad range of solutions. Adopting a systems approach and incorporating many different stakeholders are central to encouraging deep engagement and evaluation of how a project, or an intervention, can create social value. One tool to assist investors in assessing and identifying the impact of their investments is the HIP which we discuss below. Currently, much focus on social value is concentrated on the procurement phase of the project lifecycle. This is an important step, bridging the

280  Ani Raiden and Andrew King strategic brief, client ambitions, and delivery in practice. In this phase, the social value needs must be explicitly articulated, in both tendering and the formation of contracts, and decision-making is best focused on Value for Money (VfM; not lowest cost), whereby the quality of social value interventions and outcomes is prioritised over cost. We discuss social procurement in Chapters 6 and 7. In design development, the client’s role in incorporating social value into design briefs is highlighted, together with the need for thorough community consultation, engagement, and/or co-design. The Social Value Maturity Framework refers to the Supply Chain Sustainability School’s (2017) guide on Social Value in the Built Environment, which promotes how designers and architects can generate social value by: • • • • • •

Integrating people’s view into design decision-making Supporting cultural integration and social cohesion Designing assets that promote health and well-being of users Enhancing lifespan and value assets Supporting economic prosperity Doing business, responsibly.

We show examples of client drive and community engagement in Chapters 9 and 13, and we discuss design development in Chapters 11 and 12. The final phase of ‘what you build’ is planning approvals, and this phase of the Social Value Maturity Framework draws in Local Authority policy and the Planning Inspectorate as the key agents in encouraging clients to incorporate social value in their project planning applications. This is achieved by calling for Local Authorities to make an explicit link between their social value policy and planning approvals for new development and infrastructure projects, even though their ability to enforce additional social value benefits may be limited. We showcase an example of good practice in a Local Authority integrating social value into planning in Chapter 13. How you build In the construction phase of a project, employment and skills-based interventions are increasingly commonplace and high in opportunity to create and deliver social value. The Social Value Maturity Framework advocates for further, more holistic and creative approaches to social value, based on local needs analysis. As with the strategic brief, this might involve, for example, using SIA, which we discuss below. In addition, the TOMs Framework (which we also introduce below) is highlighted as a useful starting point for engaging with standard good practice actions across employment and skills, business growth, communities, environment, and innovation. Contract management and a need for consistent reporting and auditing of social value data are two important areas for improvement with regard

Selected tools  281 to ‘how to build’. Fully embedding social value-related commitments into contracts is an essential first step in contract management, before considerations of implementation, support, monitoring, reporting, and auditing. In reporting and auditing, Dobson et al (2020: 27) refer to the seven principles set out by Social Value UK, which we discuss in Chapter 14. How you operate Finally, ‘how you operate’ includes considerations of social value in the operation and decommissioning phases of projects. Again, as with construction, embedding social value into the core business values and strategy in the operation phase is important. Procurement should integrate the principles of social value, for example, in considering procuring from SMEs, Social Enterprises, and Social Businesses (see Chapters 6 and 7). In decommissioning, a strategic approach is suggested to include staff and other local stakeholders so that projects can proactively be steered towards creating and delivering social value throughout the whole project lifecycle. Reuse and recycling of materials, for example, may usefully develop opportunities for SMEs, Social Enterprises and Social Businesses, and/or there may be opportunities to develop new kinds of employment options. Raiden et al (2019) present a case study of a nuclear decommissioning project which shows how considering, creating, and delivering social value is a circular and dynamic process. Full detail of the Social Value Maturity Framework and further information is available from Dobson, J., Behar, C., Ramsden, C., Crudgington, A. and Heulin, C-A. (2020) Maximising social value from infrastructure projects, London: Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE) usefulprojects, https://usefulprojects.co.uk/ wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Maximising_social_value_from_infrastructure_ projects_v1.1.pdf

CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative The CoST programme (the Infrastructure Transparency Initiative) is as an international example of good practice in voluntary cross-sector collaboration and multiple stakeholders working together with the aim of improving transparency and accountability in public infrastructure at a high level. CoST works globally to promote the disclosure, validation, and interpretation of data from infrastructure projects to inform and empower citizens and enable them to hold decision-makers to account on public infrastructure development and spending (CoST, 2020a). At a national level, they work with government, private sector, and civil society organisations. Internationally, CoST works with key anti-corruption organisations to facilitate the global exchange of experience and knowledge on transparency and accountability.

282  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Table 15.2 Summary information – The CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

A global initiative An independent review of the Not organisation improving disclosed data specific, only transparency and An assessment of quantitative relevant to accountability and qualitative data, including country and any in public environmental and social government infrastructure, via impact department multi-stakeholder Bank of resources and research or agency at a working, disclosure, free to use national/global assurance and social level accountability.

CoST works to five key principles that reflect a shared stakeholder commitment to transparency and accountability: •

•

•

• •

Governments are responsible for providing reliable, safe, and inclusive infrastructure Public infrastructure should support sustainable economic growth and development and benefit all people. Mismanagement, inefficiency, or corruption in the sector undermines the significant social and economic benefits that well-designed infrastructure can bring. Governments should be accountable Citizens have a right to know that their money is being used wisely. Public infrastructure projects should be transparent so that government can be held accountable. Transparency improves governance Disclosure of information across the infrastructure project cycle can provide an effective means to improve VfM by reducing opportunities for corruption and increasing scrutiny. Transparency promotes investor confidence Transparency promotes better management of public infrastructure, which is likely to increase domestic and foreign direct investment. Multi-stakeholder cooperation reflects shared interest and responsibility Multi-stakeholder working between government, private sector, and civil society improves transparency and builds trust as all opinions are taken into account (CoST, 2020b).

Further information is available via http://infrastructuretransparency.org

Selected tools  283

Human Impact and Profit Scorecard (HIP) The HIP is a tool for investors to assess and identify the impact of their investments on 30 metrics across five categories: health, wealth, earth, equality, and trust (Herman, 2020). Each category maps to a specific business result, from innovative products to inspired people, to (potentially) increased profits and an improved planet; and offers an evaluation on the human, social, and environmental impact as well as profit characteristics, such as risk, return, and liquidity (ibid). This tool is not freely available; fees currently start from $500 per month. Table 15.3 Summary information – The Human Impact and Profit Scorecard (HIP) Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

A tool for investors to identify the positive human impacts that arise from investments. Uses quantitative measures of performance which are assigned by HIP.

Measures across health, wealth, earth, equality, and trust Results in a graph to compare investments Offers validation as an independent party

Focused on how organisations behave and not how individuals may be impacted The ‘score’ is a number/ percentage that can be hard to understand

The HIP can be particularly useful for larger projects, for example, in strengthening the investment case for an infrastructure work as part of the ICE usefulprojects Social Value Maturity Framework (Dobson et al, 2020: 20) we introduced above. Further information is available via https://hipinvestor.com/news/hip-scorecard-and-framework-recognizedas-a-leading-methodology/

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) The SIA is a free-to-use methodology that includes the processes of analysing, monitoring, and managing the intended and unintended (positive and negative) social consequences of planned interventions (policies, programmes, plans, projects) and any social change processes invoked by those interventions. Its primary purpose is to bring about a more sustainable and equitable biophysical and human environment (Vanclay, 2003). SIA is best understood as an umbrella, or overarching framework, that embodies the evaluation of all impacts on humans and on all the ways in which people and communities interact with their socio-cultural, economic, and biophysical surroundings.

284  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Table 15.4 Summary information – The Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

A method of identifying and assessing any social concerns (including areas for positive enhancement and reducing negative impacts).

Good framework to adopt to identify what areas can be impacted during projects Used proactively before a project commences Impacts can be selected to suit project needs

Only offers guidance on identification and not measurement Not suitable to provide detailed measurement assistance of how practices may have an impact on individuals

The SIA process has five steps: • • • • •

Understand who is likely to be impacted and how Understand the affected communities, relevant issues and establish a ‘before project baseline’ Estimate and prioritise potential impacts Develop management measures to mitigate adverse impacts and enhance benefits Support monitoring and reporting (see Figure 15.2).

Figure 15.2 The five steps in Social Impact Assessment.

Examples of social impacts include: • • • • •

People’s way of life: how they live, work, and interact with one another on a daily basis Culture: the shared beliefs, customs, values, and language or dialect Community: its cohesion, stability, character, services, and facilities Political systems: the extent to which people are able to participate in decisions that affect their lives, and the resources provided for this purpose Health and well-being: the state of complete physical, mental, social, and spiritual well-being (Vanclay, 2003; IISD, 2016).

Importantly, good social impact analysis requires an understanding of its core concepts such as culture, community, power, human rights, gender,

Selected tools  285 justice, place, resilience, sustainable livelihoods, and capital assets, as well as of the theoretical bases for participatory approaches (Esteves et al, 2012). Thus, such an analysis necessitates the involvement of social scientists who have the training and a progressive understanding of how social relationships are created, how they change, and how they respond to change. For further information, see International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA): https://www. iaia.org/ International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD): https://www. iisd.org/learning/eia/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/SIA.pdf

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) CBA involves adding up the benefits of a course of action, and then comparing these with the costs associated with it. It can be used to measure the social value of a project by calculating the positive and negative impacts the project has had, or will have, on the well-being of individuals in society by measuring this in monetary terms. Fujiwara and Dass (2020) argue that CBA is currently the internationally endorsed best practice method for social value measurement (Table 15.5). Table 15.5 Summary information – Cost-benefit analysis Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

An assessment and measurement in monetary terms of the positive and negative outcomes (benefits and costs) of a project and their impacts on people’s quality of life.

Public sector preferred best practice Comprehensive and customisable Engages stakeholders Long history in research and policy making

Assessment and measurement in monetary terms only Very resource-intensive

Furthermore, Fujiwara and Dass (2020) explain that under CBA, positive financial values represent improvements in people’s quality of life, and vice versa; negative financial values represent deteriorations in people’s quality of life. These monetised benefits and costs are then aggregated to the societal level; over the number of years, the benefits and costs of the project are expected to continue. The aggregated costs are subtracted from the aggregated benefits to provide a net benefit figure. The net benefits represent the social value to society that the project has created: a positive net benefit demonstrates that, on the whole, the project improves the quality of life in society and hence has delivered social value. Projects with higher levels of net benefits have higher levels of social value.

286  Ani Raiden and Andrew King CBA can capture the positive and negative quality of life impacts of a project for all stakeholders, including individuals and communities, businesses, and the government. Environmental impacts are captured indirectly through their impact on people’s quality of life. In this way, Fujiwara and Dass (2020) argue that it is a comprehensive assessment of costs, benefits, and social value. Broadly speaking, there are two types of impact: • •

Financial impacts are outcomes that have a direct impact on cash and finances. These include impacts on, for example, people’s income, tax payments, business revenues, and government spending and resources. Non-financial impacts are outcomes that are not immediately cashable, but are nevertheless important. These include impacts on people’s education and health, crime rates, environment and pollution, heritage and culture, community pride and cohesion, and social capital.

Although everything is measured in monetary terms, CBA can capture both financial and non-financial impacts. Often, it is the non-financial impacts where the highest level, or most impactful, social value is generated. For this reason, over the past few decades, work on social value methodology has predominantly focused on developing methods for valuing non-financial impacts, and social value assessment and measurement as a field is currently most interested in this area. Fujiwara and Dass (2020) highlight three approaches for valuing non-financial impacts that are within the globally endorsed guidelines: revealed preference, stated preference, and subjective well-being valuation methods. All require extensive data, and specialist knowledge of statistical analysis (for details, see Fujiwara and Dass, 2020: 27–33). Thus, although the final calculations for CBA look relatively simple and straightforward, as we show below, it is the processes involved in getting to the required sums of ‘present value of total benefits’ and ‘present value of the total costs’ that can be time-consuming and complex. The final calculations in CBA are as follows: Net benefit calculation: Social value = Present value of the total benefits – Present value of the total costs Benefit-cost ratio (BCR): Social value = (Present value of the total benefits) (Present value of the total costs) Note: VfM may be used in place of benefit-cost ratio. A project with a positive net benefit figure, or a benefit-cost ratio that is greater than 1 (BCR>1), is deemed to create social value. The higher

Selected tools  287 the net benefits or benefit-cost ratio figure, the greater the level of social value. Further information is available from Fujiwara and Dass (2020) Measuring social value in infrastructure projects: insights from the public sector, London: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/knowledge/research/insights/measuring-social-value_1st-edition.pdf

Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) The LM3 system was developed by the New Economics Foundation as a simple and understandable way of measuring local economic impact (NEF Consulting, 2020). It measures how income entering the local economy circulates within it, across three ‘rounds’ of spending: The measuring process starts with a source of income, and it then follows how the money is spent and re-spent within a defined geographic area. Table 15.6 Summary information – Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

A tool that helps organisations calculate the financial impact their spending has on local economies and how this spending then circulates within the economy.

Easy to use Increasingly well known Easy to express impact A good tool for financial measurement of spending

Reduces impacts to monetary metrics Doesn’t measure the ‘deeper’ impacts Fails to understand the more nuanced and non-financial impacts organisations’ actions can have on individuals

The Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) system was designed with three aims in mind: 1 2 3

To help people think about local money flows How their organisation can practically improve its local economic impact To influence the public sector to consider the impact of its procurement decisions.

In three simple steps, the LM3 calculations may take shape as follows: 1

Identify the initial income: for an individual, this may be pay from employment in construction, or perhaps in related consultancy work, and for an organisation this could, for example, be business turnover.

288  Ani Raiden and Andrew King 2 3

Measure how that initial income is spent: where does an individual employee, for example, spend their weekly/monthly pay, or where does the organisation spend their money? Measure the follow-on spending: where do the individuals/organisations who have received the money in round two spend the money?

Table 15.7 Two example scenarios for calculating LM3 LM3 round

An organisation

1

A turnover of £100,000 in a given period

2

3

Calculating the LM3

*

Individual

Monthly salary from employment as a QS for a local contractor (£2,850 *) £80,000 of this is spent locally, £1,200 of this is spent locally including employee pay, (on rent payments to an and materials suppliers independent landlord, in local cafes and bars, and a window cleaner, for example) Those employees and That landlord, the owners and materials suppliers spend, workers of the local cafes and in total, £40,000 locally bars, and the window cleaner, in turn, spend £850 locally Add the money from the three Add the money from the three rounds together = £220,000, rounds together = £4,900, and divide by the initial and divide by the initial income (£100,000) and so income (£2,850) and so LM3 LM3 = 2.20 = 1.72

Based on average annual salary of £34,300 (source: https://www.payscale.com/research/ UK/Job=Quantity_Surveyor/Salary).

Very importantly, the LM3 figure is only ever an indicator of the local impact, not an exact measurement. Overall, it gives a useful general sense of the value of an activity (spending) in the local economy (Sacks, 2002: 20). Further information is available via NEF Consulting: https://www.nefconsulting.com/our-services/evaluationimpact-assessment/local-multiplier-3/ Sacks, J. (2002) The money trail, measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3, London: New Economics Foundation and The Countryside Agency, https://nefconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TheMoney Trail.pdf

Social Return on Investment (SROI) SROI is a framework for measuring and accounting social value in a way that tells a story of how change is being created by measuring social, environmental, and economic outcomes and using monetary values to represent them (Nicholls et al, 2012). This enables a ratio of benefits to costs to be

Selected tools  289 calculated. For example, a ratio of 3:1 indicates that an investment of £1 delivers £3 of social value. SROI calculations are about value, rather than money; money is simply a common unit and as such a useful and widely accepted way of conveying value (ibid). Table 15.8 Summary information – Social Return on Investment (SROI) Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

A framework method of quantifying and measuring environmental and social value. It results in a financial figure of social value created and a ration of how this compares to every £1 spent.

A comprehensive tool Widely recognised Results in easy to understand metrics and graph Promotes stakeholder involvement Takes into account the original investment

Results are financial Monetises all impacts, even if they are not easily monetised The financial outputs risk ignoring deeper impacts Very resource-intensive Can overlook and fail to identify impacts on individuals Broad metrics

The SROI framework is a well-developed social impact valuation tool used in the UK, Europe, North America, and beyond (Watson and Whitley, 2017: 876). At present, it is the most developed SIA method, and the only tool that satisfies all four aspects of Weinstein and Bradburd’s (2013) framework for evaluation, which sets out the most important features as follows: • • • •

Measuring outcomes rather than tracking outputs, The ability to compare the value of different types of benefits, The consideration of counterfactual evidence (other factors) in impact creation, and Usefulness to effective and coherent (funding) decisions (Watson and Whitley, 2017: 879).

Nicholls et al (2012) specify that there are six stages to carrying out an SROI analysis: • • •

Establishing scope and identifying key stakeholders. It is important to have clear boundaries about what your SROI analysis will cover, who will be involved in the process, and how. Mapping outcomes. Through engaging with your stakeholders, you will develop an impact map, or theory of change, which shows the relationship between inputs, outputs, and outcomes. Evidencing outcomes and giving them a value. This stage involves finding data to show whether outcomes have happened and then valuing them.

290  Ani Raiden and Andrew King • • •

Establishing impact. Having collected evidence on outcomes and monetised them, those aspects of change that would have happened anyway, or are a result of other factors, are eliminated from consideration. Calculating the SROI. This stage involves adding up all the benefits, subtracting any negatives, and comparing the result to the investment. This is also where the sensitivity of the results can be tested. Reporting, using, and embedding. Easily forgotten, this vital last step involves sharing findings with stakeholders and responding to them, embedding good outcomes processes and verification of the report.

It is stages three (finding data to show whether outcomes have happened and then valuing them) and four (monetising the outcomes and eliminating from consideration those aspects of change that would have happened anyway or are a result of other factors) that we urge approaching with great care. There are case studies of success (see, for example, Watson and Whitley, 2017) and increasing recognition in industry. However, Bridgeman et al (2015, 2016) and others report that using SROI is resource-intensive, time-consuming, and expensive process to undertake, and the monetisation of social outcomes continues to be contentious. As with CBA, it requires extensive data, and specialist skills. Further information is available via Nicholls, J., Lawlor, E., Neitzert, E. and Goodspeed, T. (2012) A guide to social return on Investment, The SROI Network, ISBN: 978-0-9562274-0-9, http://www. socialvalueuk.org/app/uploads/2016/03/The%20Guide%20to%20Social%20Return%20on%20Investment%202015.pdf [accessed 12 November 2020]. Watson, K J and Whitley, T (2017) Applying social return on investment to the built environment. Building Research & Information, 45(08), 875–891.

TOMs Framework The TOMs in the National TOMs Framework stand for Themes, Outcomes, and Measures: • • •

Themes: the overarching strategic themes that an organisation is looking to pursue Outcomes: the objectives or goals that an organisation is looking to achieve that will contribute to the theme Measures: the measures that can be used to assess whether these Outcomes have been achieved. These are action-based and represent activities that a supplier could complete to support a particular desired outcome (The Social Value Portal, 2021).

The aim of the TOMs Framework is to provide a minimum reporting standard for measuring social value. It has quickly gained presence in the marketplace, and it is now widely used in the public and private sectors in the UK (The Social Value Portal, 2020).

Selected tools  291 Table 15.9 Summary information – TOMs Framework Key information

Advantages

Disadvantages

Open source, MS Excel based TOM (Theme/Outcome/ Measures) framework method for quantifying and measuring and reporting environmental and social value. Uses financial proxies for many measures and results in monetised figures of social value.

A comprehensive tool, widely recognised Clear guidance Results in easy to understand metrics Various plug-ins (for example, real estate plug-in and a COVID-19 plug-in) allows customisation Related social value maturity index survey available Promotes stakeholder involvement: stakeholder and beneficiary surveys included Impacts can be selected and prioritised to suit project/ local needs

Results are financial Possibly reduces impact by assigning a monetary value Monetary value can be easily manipulated Requires in-house resource to learn and use the tool

For those organisations (private and public) just starting out on their journey to embed social value into their procurement and management processes, the TOMs Framework provides an easy to use solution that is immediately available, and may be applied to any project. For those organisations that are already well advanced in their social value journey, the hope is that they will integrate these standards into their measurement approach as a minimum, and add any measures that they presently do not have in their own toolkit (The Social Value Portal, 2021). The framework consists of five themes, 20 outcomes, and 48 measures, all aimed at supporting organisations by: • • • • •

Providing a consistent approach to measuring and reporting social value Allowing for continuous improvement Providing a robust, transparent, and defensible solution for assessing and awarding tenders Allowing organisations to compare their own performance by sector and industry benchmarks and understand what good looks like Reducing the uncertainty surrounding social value measurement for businesses, allowing them to make informed decisions based on robust quantitative assessments and hence embed social value into their corporate strategies (The Social Value Portal, 2021).

292  Ani Raiden and Andrew King The five themes are as follows: •

•

• •

•

Jobs: Promote Local Skills and Employment: To promote growth and development opportunities for all within a community and ensure that they have access to opportunities to develop new skills and gain meaningful employment Growth: Supporting Growth of Responsible Regional Business: To provide local businesses with the skills to compete and the opportunity to work as part of public sector and big business supply chains Social: Healthier, Safer, and more Resilient Communities: To build stronger and deeper relationships with the voluntary and social enterprise sectors whilst continuing to engage and empower citizens Environment: Decarbonising and Safeguarding our World: To ensure that the places where people live and work are cleaner and greener, to promote sustainable procurement and secure the long-term future of our planet Innovation: Promoting Social Innovation: To promote new ideas and find innovative solutions to old problems (The Social Value Portal, 2021).

Research shows that the biggest challenges with using the TOMs are that SMEs within the supply chain can struggle with them, given their limited resource base, and bidders tend to focus on the measures that have the most financial value attached to them (The Social Value Portal, 2020), albeit these may not be the priority areas for the local community. Feedback from industry also indicates that whilst some of the themes have well-developed measures, some, for example, the environment theme, have weaker points. For example, NT31 for Reduction of Carbon focuses on ‘Savings in CO2 emissions on contract achieved through de-carbonisation’. However, there is no benchmark or definition against which one makes this assessment. This poses questions about whether is it necessary to run, for example, two Building Regulations UK, Part L (BRUKL) calculations and make an assessment this way, or should carbon emissions be included as part of the construction process? Also, how do we deal with the emissions reductions realised in-use? Further information is available via The Social Value Portal, https://socialvalueportal.com/national-toms/ We have only highlighted a selection of tools available in the market; there are of course many other tools that researchers and practitioners have developed, and are currently developing, that we haven’t included in our summary Table 14.2 in Chapter 14 or discussion here in Chapter 15. Our aim is to provide an insight into the range of methods and tools available, and to signpost readers towards sources of further information.

Selected tools  293

Chapter summary We advocate a mixed-methods approach to social value assessment and measurement that uses both qualitative elements and quantitative data. In this chapter, we have introduced a range of frameworks, models, and tools representing a range of different ways to assess and measure social value. We began with the ICE usefulprojects Social Value Maturity Framework as it shows a clear and visual overview of social value throughout a project lifecycle. We followed this with an outline introduction to the CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, HIP, and SIA. Finally, we introduced CBA, LM3, SROI, and the TOMs Framework. It is important that each manager and organisation makes informed decisions about selecting and using the different tools and methods for assessing and measuring social value. These decisions need to correspond to their needs and the level of skill and resource available. We highlight the Social Value Maturity Framework, SIA, and the TOMs Framework as universally helpful starting points for considering, creating, and delivering social value in practice, including assessment and measurement. They offer a straightforward approach at minimal or no cost that practitioners can readily apply in their organisations and for specific projects.

References Bridgeman, J., Maple, P., Murdock, A., Hardy, S. and Townley, C. (2016) Demonstrating the social value of a schools engagement programme: Introducing young people to the construction professions, In Chan, P.W. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 32nd annual ARCOM conference, 5–7 September, Manchester, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 1007–1016. Bridgeman, J., Murdock, A., Maple, P., Townley, C. and Graham, J. (2015) Putting a value on young people’s journey into construction: Introducing SROI at Construction Youth Trust, In Raiden, A.B. and Aboagye-Nimo, E. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 31st annual ARCOM conference, 7–9 September, Lincoln, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 207–216. CoST (2020a) About us, London: CoST – the Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, http://infrastructuretransparency.org/about-us/ [accessed 11 November 2020]. CoST (2020b) Our Principles, London: CoST – the Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, http://infrastructuretransparency.org/about-us/our-mission-and-vision/ our-principles/ [accessed 11 November 2020]. Dobson, J., Behar, C., Ramsden, C., Crudgington, A. and Heulin, C-A. (2020) Maximising social value from infrastructure projects, London: Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE) usefulprojects, https://usefulprojects.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Maximising_social_value_from_infrastructure_projects_v1.1.pdf [accessed 12 November 2020]. Esteves, A.M., Franks, D. and Vanclay, F. (2012) Social impact assessment: The state of the art, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), 34–42, DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2012.660356. Fujiwara and Dass (2020) Measuring social value in infrastructure projects: Insights from the public sector, London: Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS).

294  Ani Raiden and Andrew King Herman, R.P. (2020) Measuring human impact + profit: The new fundamentals of investing, Green Money Journal [online], https://greenmoney.com/measuringhuman-impact-profit-the-new-fundamentals-of-investing/#:~:text=The%20 HIP%20Scorecard%20analyzes%2030,and%20a%20more%20improved%20planet [accessed 11 November 2020]. IISD (2016) Social impact assessment, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), https://www.iisd.org/learning/eia/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ SIA.pdf [accessed 11 November 2020]. NEF Consulting (2020) Local Multiplier 3 (LM3), London: NEF Consulting, https://www.nefconsulting.com/our-services/evaluation-impact-assessment/ local-multiplier-3/ [accessed 11 November 2020]. Nicholls, J., Lawlor, E., Neitzert, E. and Goodspeed, T. (2012) A guide to Social Return on Investment, The SROI Network, ISBN: 978-0-9562274-0-9, http://www. socialvalueuk.org/app/uploads/2016/03/The%20Guide%20to%20Social%20Return%20on%20Investment%202015.pdf [accessed 12 November 2020]. Raiden, A.B., Loosemore, M., King, A. and Gorse, C. (2019) Social value in construction, Abingdon: Taylor and Francis, ISBN: 9781138295094. Sacks, J. (2002) The money trail, measuring your impact on the local economy using LM3, London: New Economics Foundation and The Countryside Agency, https://nefconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/TheMoneyTrail.pdf [accessed 3 May 2021]. Supply Chain Sustainability School (2017) Social value and design of the built environment, London: Supply Chain Sustainability School. The Social Value Portal (2020) SVP Webinar: The National TOMs Workshop, London: The Social Value Portal, Monday 11 May [online]. The Social Value Portal (2021) The National TOMs Framework, London: The Social Value Portal, https://socialvalueportal.com/national-toms/ [accessed 8 May 2021]. Vanclay, F. (2003) International principles for social impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21(1), 5–12, DOI: 10.3152/147154603781766491. Watson, K.J. and Whitley, T. (2017) Applying social return on investment to the built environment. Building Research & Information, 45(08), 875–891. Weinstein, M.M. and Bradburd, R.M. (2013) The Robin Hood rules for smart giving, New York: Columbia University Press.

16 Conclusion Ani Raiden and Andrew King

The purpose of this book was to construct a call to action on social value. We have introduced the central role that the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) play and referred to selected targets throughout the text. We invite you to get involved with this agenda for change. The current global Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted and shifted people’s priorities, and to us, maintaining that momentum and driving real change for a more humane world is essential.

We advocate a view of social value that is contextual and contingent upon the specific circumstances of each project, organisation, and local community. It follows that we encourage people and organisations to form their own bespoke definitions of social value and focus on doing the right thing. Assessing and measuring social value is important; however, it is equally important to remain cognisant that social value is about co-creating value and achieving social impact, and both the process and outcomes may be difficult to measure in a numerical form. There are many technical and cultural challenges to achieving cross-sector collaboration. Stakeholder analysis and managing relationships with stakeholders require a co-operative approach based on trust and communication. Alongside the external project partners, some of the most important stakeholders in any organisation are the people they employ: their employees, workers, and the self-employed. We have explored the considerable opportunity to consider, create, and deliver social value through thinking about the conditions of employment, training and development, and equality, diversity, and inclusion in particular. Driving diversification of the workforce to deliver social value requires minimum standards in legislation, a robust business case, and ultimately drawing on moral arguments for doing the right thing. The different perspectives in this book (clients, developers, designers and architects, urban planning, consultants, national and local contractors, university and a professional body) illuminate how they can collectively realise sustainable production. Their efforts align to achieve the SDGs beyond what any individual project or initiative would be able to deliver alone. With a partnership model at the heart, we show how it is possible to transform DOI: 10.1201/9781003024910-20

296  Ani Raiden and Andrew King the industrial and societal system in the built environment. The interplay between social value and the SDGs is founded upon a harmonious relationship: social value offers a practice-based and localised focus, whereas the SDGs can be understood as a global framework, broad in scope, that unites action. This is the conclusion to our book, but it is not the end of the journey; far from it. There is work to do and we all have a role to play. We need to disrupt the old ways that no longer serve us and instead create a sustainable future where we look after the planet and all its inhabitants. We must also remember that any ‘new normal’ will only be temporary as the pace of change continues to accelerate. We need to make sure that we respond to these changes and drive social value throughout everything we do. We have given you some ideas to consider and digest. We now invite you to critically reflect upon your own approach to life, your system of ethics and values, as you answer: Knowing all of this, what will I do differently?

Index

affirmative action see positive action age see young/ youth; retirement; equality of opportunity; SDG 10 agile 111, 217–224, 229, 233–234 allies 63–65, 67–68; see also equality of opportunity; managing diversity and inclusion Alt-Erlaa 165–168 apprenticeships 34, 54, 73–105, 107–108, 135, 139, 142, 146–147, 170, 176–178, 197–198, 262–264, 268–269; Assessment of Professional Competence (APC) 74–76, 79–87, 92; competencies 73, 81–83, 85–86, 92; counsellor 79–80, 83–87, 92; duties 75, 90; mentor/ mentoring 77–79, 85–86, 88–92, 97, 102; End Point Assessment 74–75, 80, 82; learning provider (University) 34, 49–50, 72, 74–75, 77, 84–85, 89, 92–93, 95, 97, 100–101; levels of qualification 73; levy 34, 74, 94–95, 100; learning/ activity log 80, 88–89; progress review 77, 82–83, 90–92; standard 76; supervisor 80, 83, 85–87, 92, 104; widening participation 100; Workplace Tutor 77, 85, 91–92, 97; see also Careers; Skills; Training and development architect 18, 33, 48–50, 98, 110, 115–116, 120–123, 127, 130, 138, 143, 155–159, 162–163, 166, 204, 214–216, 218–219, 221, 223–224, 227, 229–230, 233, 250, 280 architecture 29–30, 74, 98, 151, 159, 162–163, 214–234 AR Demolition and Aggregate Recycling 127–128 armed forces 68, 170, 175, 180; see also managing diversity and inclusion

assessing social value 30–33, 42, 66, 259–275, 277–279; mixed-method 259–267, 270; CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative 271, 277, 281–282; Human Impact and Profit Scorecard (HIP) 272, 283; Social Impact Assessment (SIA) 283–285, 289; social network mapping 236–237; see also measuring social value Baxendale 215–220, 224–234 B Corporation 29, 112–113; see also social enterprises behavioural assimilation 26; see also social value orientation behavioural change 22, 31, 33, 54–55, 63, 66–68, 93, 109, 185, 194, 208, 217, 243, 243, 245–246, 253–254, 268, 283 bottom-up 3, 23, 54–55, 113, 154–155, 161–162, 211, 233, 243, 245, 252; see also Top-down British Academy of Management (BAM) 66 business case 21, 27–28, 30, 61, 63, 66, 154–155 BREEAM 144–145, 147, 216; see also environment BS 8950 4, 20, 185 Business for Societal Impact (B4SI) 178–179, 180 carbon 16, 117, 125, 128–129, 131, 145, 175, 208–209, 216, 241–243, 245–247, 249–250, 292; see also environment; SDG 13 careers 16, 34, 58, 66–68, 84, 86, 89, 93, 95–96, 100, 102–103, 142, 177–178, 180, 184, 224, 262–264

298 Index care leavers 68, 170, 175, 180, 185; see also managing diversity and inclusion charity 22, 29, 49–50, 112, 139–141, 144, 146, 170–171, 173–174, 177, 230, 245, 260, 269; volunteering 54, 59, 139–142, 145–146, 178, 223, 227, 230, 236, 244, 250, 252 Chartered Management Institute (CMI) 66 CIOB 16, 65, 96 CIPD 60, 67, 70 circular: business models 20, 110, 119–126, 221, 223, 226; challenges 33; construction 122; design 120–121; economy 33, 115–132, 246; expertise 33; materials 33, 115, 119, 121–122, 125, 127–129; resource flow loops 115, 128; strategies 119–121, 126–127; supply chain 33, 117, 126–128; vision 20, 117–119, 126 CITB 64 city planning see planning client 22–23, 28, 33, 43, 45, 49–50, 76, 81, 96, 115, 119, 122–123, 126, 130, 136–140, 144–145, 147, 150–167, 172, 181, 184, 186–187, 195–197, 216, 220, 230, 267, 279–280 climate action see SDG 13; environment co-design see design collaboration: cross-sector (see sector); see circular community: consultation 18, 158, 280; engagement 14–18, 174, 176, 178, 194, 197, 221, 223, 227, 230, 236, 240, 244–245, 247, 249–254, 260, 265, 280; development 230, 241, 161–163; regeneration 135–136, 142–143, 159–165, 195, 197–198, 204, 211, 215, 237–239, 268; see also defining; SDG 11 compliance 21, 27, 29, 33–34, 57, 61–62, 89, 143, 180, 250; see also legislation and the regulatory frameworks conservation see heritage consultant 4–5, 32, 43, 48–50, 75, 77, 79, 95, 98, 135–147, 155–156, 159–160, 163, 269, 278, 287 consumption see SDG 12 contract 4–5, 43, 46, 81, 91, 108–111, 137–138, 142, 159, 178, 187, 265, 280–281, 292; for services 43, 53, 55–58, 182, 187; NEC4 Alliance 108; of employment 43, 53, 55–59, 142; see

also frameworks; partnerships; social procurement contractor 5, 32, 43, 48–50, 56, 75, 86, 90, 107, 110–111, 117, 122–123, 126, 128–130, 138, 142–143, 159, 170–189, 262–264, 268–269; sub-contractor 34, 45–46, 48–49, 56, 75, 78, 108–110, 112, 122, 138, 142 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 21, 41, 197 cost-benefit analysis see measuring social value CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative see assessing social value Covid-19 see pandemic cross-sector collaboration see sector culture see organisation customer 43, 45, 76, 110, 112, 119, 123, 136, 150–153, 155–158, 165, 173–175, 178, 181, 183–186, 208, 217; loyalty 110, 136, 140; service 28, 110, 136, 150–151, 155, 165, 173–175, 181, 185; see also business case defining: community 17, 185–186; collaborative design 194; social capital 240; social housing 166; social value 3–5, 18–22, 25, 218, 224, 260; stakeholders 42–43, 46; see also equality of opportunity: protected characteristics design 18, 20, 22, 30–31, 49, 81, 92, 98, 110, 115–116, 119–122, 126–127, 142, 150–159, 161, 164–167, 193–195, 197, 199–211, 215–217, 219–224, 227–233, 236, 238, 240–254, 280; see also placemaking designer 33, 117, 122, 155–156, 158–163, 236–238, 280 Design Quality Framework 241–254 developer 115, 131, 197–198, 236, 238, 242, 244 development see training and development digitisation 14, 16, 92–93, 96, 115, 122– 124, 130–131, 205, 208–209, 221, 223; see also technological development disabilities 9–10, 34, 53, 60, 62–63, 68–70, 102, 104, 107–112, 165, 167, 188, 199, 211; see also equality of opportunity; SDG 10 discrimination 8, 56, 61–62, 64, 67, 69–70, 188; harassment 61–62, 64, 67;

Index  299 victimisation 61–62, 64, 67; see also compliance; equality of opportunity; SDG 10 diversity see managing diversity and inclusion economic: assessment 216, 219–220, 287–288; development 9, 21, 142–143, 147, 211; growth 6–7, 9, 16–17, 22, 60, 70–72, 102, 104, 110, 117, 131, 146, 188, 226, 232, 261, 266, 282; inclusion 8, 10, 22, 70, 210; infrastructure 214, 219, 233, 283; poverty 4–8, 11, 167, 214, 226, 231–232, 236–237, 266; prosperity 4, 6, 28–29, 72, 116, 118, 128, 142, 280; sustainability 7, 20, 28, 163, 193, 226; value for money 29–30, 108, 216, 237, 280; see also SDG 8 education see SDG 4; apprenticeships emissions 16, 117, 128, 143, 292; see also environment employee see contract employment 4, 6–9, 14–15, 20, 49, 53–70, 89, 94, 100, 172; conditions of 16, 20–21, 53–54, 57–70, 99, 142, 150–155, 173, 179, 266; opportunities for 5, 15, 20–21, 33–34, 53–54, 57–58, 60, 62, 65, 68–70, 94–96, 104, 107–112, 115, 119, 128–132, 135, 138–142, 146–147, 157, 170, 175–178, 180, 182, 184, 188, 194, 197–198, 223, 226, 229–231, 262, 268–269, 280–281, 292; protection and rights (see legislation and the regulatory frameworks); relations 53, 57, 59; see also SDG 8; contract energy 6–7, 9, 16–17, 115, 119–121, 125, 143–147, 208, 211, 214–216, 221, 223, 233, 242, 247, 267; see also SDG 7 environment 4, 7, 16–17, 20–22, 27, 30, 49, 110–112, 116–119, 121, 129–131, 135–136, 139–141, 143–147, 152, 154, 157–158, 161–163, 164, 171, 175, 181, 214, 216, 219–220, 223, 227, 233, 237, 266–267, 269, 280, 282–283, 286, 288, 292; climate emergency 1, 207–209, 216; see also SDG 13; measuring social value: life cycle assessment equality of opportunity 53, 58–59, 61–63, 65–70, 99–102, 136, 155, 166, 175, 180, 199, 201, 210, 260, 263–265, 269, 272, 283; protected characteristics 61–63, 70, 100; see also inequality;

managing diversity and inclusion; SDG 5; SDG 10 ethics 21–23, 27, 41, 76, 108, 186, 230, 233, 260–267, 269 ethnic minority 10, 16, 62, 66, 68, 70, 103–104, 107–109, 112, 154, 164–165, 167, 188, 199, 211, 265; BAME 66, 103, 154; see also equality of opportunity; SDG 10 EU directives 21, 27; see also legislation and the regulatory frameworks ex-offenders 34, 68, 109, 111, 185; see also managing diversity and inclusion; SDG 10 fair trade 107–108; see also circular; social enterprises flexible firm 56–57; see also contract flexible working 53, 59–60, 64–65, 67–68, 103, 142, 154 focus consultants 135–148 frameworks (procurement, public sector) 59, 107–109, 136–138, 148, 159, 175, 177, 181–182, 268 gender 6, 8–9, 16, 34, 53, 60–63, 66–70, 102–104, 107–108, 112, 147, 157, 170, 174–175, 179, 183–184, 188, 266, 284; transgender/ transsexual 16, 62, 64, 67; see also equality of opportunity; SDG 5; SDG 10 The Glass-House Community Led Design 193–194, 199–212 grand challenge 5–6, 22; wicked problem 17 health, safety and well-being 4, 6–8, 16, 34, 53, 56, 59–61, 79, 83–84, 90, 118, 136, 147, 150–151, 153, 161, 163–167, 180–181, 211, 215, 217, 226, 228, 231–232, 236–237, 247, 266, 280, 283–286; see also SDG 3 heritage 10, 68–69, 135, 143, 209–212, 224–227, 286 housing 17, 30, 97, 151–167, 178, 197, 200, 203–204, 242, 244, 247–248, 273 Human Impact and Profit Scorecard (HIP) see Assessing social value human resource (HR) management 53–70; see also workforce hunger see SDG 2

300 Index ICE 278, 281 impact 3, 6, 10, 17, 19, 22, 25, 31–32, 44, 86, 111–112, 122, 132, 140, 144–145, 151–154, 156–157, 164, 172–174, 176, 181–188, 195–197, 203–204, 215–217, 227, 229–230, 237, 259–264, 266–267, 271–275, 279, 283–290 inclusion see managing diversity and inclusion; economic inclusion; SDG 10 indigenous people 34, 102, 188; see also ethnic minority; SDG 4; SDG 10 industry image 16, 269; see also careers inequality 10, 28, 33, 66–67, 69, 215, 232; see also equality of opportunity infrastructure 6–7, 9, 15–17, 18, 30–31, 60, 97, 145, 147, 164, 166–167, 196–198, 208, 214, 219, 223, 226–227, 231–233, 245, 248, 262, 271, 274, 278–283; see also SDG 9 innovation 9, 18–19, 31, 60, 72, 102, 108–109, 111, 115, 119, 122, 126–131, 202, 204, 209, 217–218, 232, 245, 250–251, 280, 283, 292; see also social innovation; SDG 9 institutions 6, 11, 65, 85–86, 112, 217, 238, 248, 253, 260; see also SDG 16 intersectionality 53, 68–70, 269; see also equality of opportunity; managing diversity and inclusion ISO 26000 44; 9001 136; 14001 136, 144 JA Building Services Ltd 110–111 justice 112, 245, 264–266, 284–285; see also SDG 16 Kant, I. 27, 264–266 labour shortages 14–16, 18, 178; see also skills shortages leadership 8, 26, 29, 46, 54–55, 64, 66–68, 70, 89, 92–93, 102, 104, 156, 160, 163, 175, 179, 188, 193, 195–198, 206–207, 219–220, 234, 243, 253 learning 8, 32, 58, 65, 68, 73, 77–78, 83, 86, 88, 90, 93, 99, 102, 132, 142, 161, 163, 185, 204, 210, 214–216, 232–233, 246–247; see also apprenticeships; training and development; SDG 4 LGBT+ see sexual orientation; equality of opportunity; SDG 10 legislation and the regulatory frameworks 10, 21–23, 27, 34–35,

55–56, 61–62, 100, 112, 142–143, 165, 188, 211, 215–216, 219, 243, 292 life: below water (see SDG 14); on land (see SDG 15) Life cycle assessment (LCA) see measuring social value local: authority/ government 29, 33, 45, 138, 177–179, 186, 193, 195–197, 199, 219–220, 224, 230, 236–254, 280; business 33, 49, 107–111, 128–130, 150, 154, 165, 177, 217, 221, 230, 292; jobs/ labour 45, 94, 110, 118, 128, 135, 138–140, 142, 157, 172, 178, 182, 194, 197, 292; needs 3–5, 9, 18, 20–21, 28, 55, 68, 111, 113, 123, 128–130, 139, 143, 158, 160–163, 166, 173, 177–178, 193– 195, 198, 204–209, 211, 223–224, 229, 231–232, 236–254, 263, 268–269, 279– 280, 291–292; residents/ community/ demographics 17, 27, 45, 48–50, 58, 68, 111, 138, 142–143, 147, 150, 160–163, 165, 177–178, 186, 193–194, 196–200, 204–205, 209, 214, 219, 223–224, 226, 229–230, 232–234, 281; spend/ economy 23, 54, 108, 115, 118, 128, 131, 142, 145, 166, 172, 182, 198, 214, 227, 260, 272, 287–288; supply chain 118, 123–124, 128–131, 135, 138, 142, 145, 154–155, 166, 182, 186–187, 194, 198, 208, 214, 221, 223, 227, 233 Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) see measuring social value London Benchmarking Group see Business for Societal Impact (B4SI) managing diversity and inclusion 28, 53–54, 58–60, 61–76, 99–104, 155, 170, 175, 179–180, 200, 210, 260, 265; see also equality of opportunity; intersectionality; SDG 5; SDG 10 Marga Pérez 131–132 materials: choice 33, 122, 145, 214, 221, 227, 233, 267; flow 15, 117, 119, 121, 123–124, 126–127, 130–131, 133; recycling 107, 110, 115–117, 119–120, 125, 127–129, 143, 233, 145, 281; sourcing 15, 33, 110, 122–123, 138, 145; use 78, 110, 116; see also circular meaningful jobs see employment measuring social value 4–5, 21, 30–34, 42, 145–146, 171–174, 178–179, 182, 187–188, 259–264, 267–275, 277–278, 290; accounting principles 260,

Index  301 267–270; challenges and concerns 4–5, 30–32, 182; Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) 271, 277, 285–287, 290; metrics 55, 97, 179, 198–199, 220, 261–261, 268–269, 271–274, 283; life cycle assessment (LCA) 216, 220; Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) 260, 272, 277, 287–288; proxy 32, 172, 181, 259, 262–263, 268, 274; Social Return on Investment (SROI) 30, 172–173, 175, 180–183, 185, 267, 273, 277, 288–290; SDG Action Manager 275; SMART 139, 268; TOMs Framework 170, 172, 174, 179, 181, 186, 260–261, 268, 274, 278, 280, 290–292; Value for Money (VfM) 108, 216, 280, 282, 286; see also assessing social value mentoring 66, 138–143, 146, 245; see also apprenticeships: mentoring; training and development migrant workers 15, 34, 58–59, 61; see also managing diversity and inclusion; SDG 10 mindset see social value orientation moral development see ethics; social value orientation National TOMs see measuring social value not-for-profit see social enterprises; sector Nottingham City Council 236, 241–254 Nottingham social eating network 247–249 Nottingham Trent University (NTU) 75, 77–89, 91–98, 100–104 organisation: culture 26, 28, 57–58, 67–68, 90, 100, 102, 154, 249, 267; purpose 21, 28–29, 110–113, 126, 157; structure 28, 46–47, 54–58, 217–219; values 4–5, 26, 28–29, 32, 58–59, 112, 260–270; see also sector outcomes 10, 22–26, 31, 251–253, 260– 262, 267–270, 279–280, 286, 288–290, 295; see also measuring social value outputs 4, 31, 129, 138, 148, 194, 217, 223, 227, 229–231, 260, 267–270, 289; see also measuring social value pandemic 4, 15, 53, 59, 67, 78, 80, 92–93, 98, 102–103, 144, 154, 157, 175, 206–207, 244–246, 291

partnerships 6, 11, 72, 84, 108–109, 110, 142–143, 150, 154, 159–165, 170–171, 173–174, 178, 184, 197–198, 206, 217, 243–245, 250–252; see also SDG 17 pay 9, 16, 49, 53–56, 59–62, 70, 94–95, 286–288; gender pay-gap 179; see also equality of opportunity; SDG 8 peace see SDG 16 people, planet and prosperity 6 placemaking 20, 45, 193–199, 200–203, 207–210, 237–241, 243, 246–248, 251, 254 planning 10–11, 20, 22, 29, 47, 49–50, 58, 110, 138, 145, 164–167, 194–195, 198, 220–221, 224, 236–254, 262, 278–280; human resource planning 58, 102–103, 158 polarisation 4–6, 30–31 policy 21–22, 27, 29–30, 32, 54–55, 58–61, 63, 65, 70, 100, 136, 141, 143– 145, 166, 167, 175, 179–180, 193–194, 197, 200–203, 208, 219, 237, 239–254, 260, 265–269, 271, 280, 285 positive action 53, 58, 63–65, 68, 72; see also equality of opportunity; SDG 10 poverty see SDG 1 principles see social value orientation; ethics; measuring social value: accounting principles principles of social value 4–5, 12, 23, 41, 109, 260–262, 281 private sector see sector privilege 68–70; underprivileged 239; see also discrimination; intersectionality procurement 5, 10, 21–22, 27, 56, 64, 81, 91, 98, 107–113, 118, 124, 126, 137–138, 140, 150, 159, 165, 175, 179–180, 197, 215–220, 228, 273–274, 278–281, 287, 291–292; see also social procurement; frameworks production see SDG 12 professional body 21, 29, 43, 45, 65, 72, 86, 96; see also CIOB, RICS, CIPD protected characteristics see equality of opportunity proxy see measuring social value psychological safety 26; see also social value orientation public sector see sector; frameworks public services (social value) act see legislation and the regulatory frameworks public value see value

302 Index qualitative assessment see assessing social value quantitative assessment see measuring social value race 10, 53, 62, 66, 68–70, 104, 165, 167, 188, 199, 211; see also ethnic minority; equality of opportunity; inequality; SDG 10 Rawls, J. 264–266 recruitment and selection 53, 58–59, 61, 63–64, 66, 84, 100, 102, 104, 159; see also human resource (HR) management recycling; reduction; reuse see circular refugees 34; see also managing diversity and inclusion; SDG 10 responsible consumption and production see SDG 12 retirement 15, 59 RICS 15, 65–66, 75–76, 79–81, 83–87, 92, 94–95, 97, 99, 287 safety see health, safety and well-being sanitation see SDG 6 SDGs see Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) SDG Action Manager see measuring social value sector: cross-sector collaboration 28, 59, 107, 109, 193, 195–196, 198–210, 224, 239, 281; private 28–29, 33, 108–110, 137–138, 174, 181, 184, 186, 198, 282, 290, 292; public 28–29, 108–110, 135–138, 143, 174, 179, 181, 198, 271, 282, 287, 290, 292 (see also frameworks); third 28–29, 33, 109–111, 135, 143, 198, 282, 292; see also social enterprises self-employed see contract sense of: belonging 54, 102, 154, 211, 241; pride 94, 97, 286; purpose 28–29, 54, 111–112, 151, 153, 157–158, 164, 171, 184, 204, 210, 232–233, 262, 283; security 54, 58; self-esteem 31, 54, 240; self-worth and dignity 25, 54 sex 10, 16, 53, 61–62, 64, 69–70, 104, 165, 167, 188, 199, 211, 265; see also equality of opportunity; gender; SDG 5; SDG 10 sexual orientation 16, 53, 62, 64, 67–69; see also equality of opportunity; SDG 10

shareholders 28, 43, 112, 146; see also stakeholder shared value see value skills: development 8, 58, 63, 73–75, 77–80, 88, 90–92, 94, 96–100, 107, 115, 119, 129, 143, 166, 176–178, 182, 187, 214, 226–227, 232–233, 238–240, 245–246, 251, 280, 292 (see also apprentices; training and development); digital 16, 92–93; gap 16, 18, 31, 35, 251, 254, 261; retention 135, 142; set 14, 56, 75–81, 84, 92, 98–99, 223, 227, 230, 245–246, 290; sharing 173, 193, 196, 198–202, 216, 231, 249, 251, 292; shortages 14–16, 18, 93, 96, 178, 195; see also labour shortages SMART see measuring social value SMEs 9, 20, 23, 28, 32, 34, 60, 75, 110–111, 132, 188, 281 social: cohesion 54, 236–237, 240, 247, 252, 280, 286; exclusion 170, 174, 176; see also justice; SDG 16 social eating 236, 246–249 social enterprises 23, 28–29, 45, 107–109, 111–113, 118, 157, 170, 186, 230, 232, 281, 292; social businesses 45, 108, 111–113, 281; cooperatives 23, 29, 108; voluntary and community groups 21, 23, 29, 143, 236, 244, 246, 249; not-for-profit organisations; voluntary groups; see also SDG 12 Social Impact Assessment (SIA) see assessing social value social justice see justice social network mapping see assessing social value social innovation 112, 292; see also circular; SDG 9 social procurement 20–22, 33–34, 108–111, 113, 260, 266 Social return on investment (SROI) see measuring social value social structure analysis see also assessing social value Social Value Maturity Framework 174, 181, 260, 274, 278–281, 283, 291 social value orientation 23–27, 29, 55, 172, 176, 178, 260, 265–266 Southey Owlerton Area Regeneration partnership 159–165 South Yorkshire Housing Association 49, 150–159, 164–165, 197

Index  303 stakeholder: analysis 28, 42–50, 55, 173, 248, 260, 262; management 3–4, 6, 17–19, 21, 28, 33, 48–51, 99, 112, 130, 143, 154–155, 158–159, 163–164, 173, 187–188, 194, 215–221, 233, 241, 248, 250, 252–253, 259–262, 266, 268, 270–274, 279–282, 289–290; matrix 47–48; mapping 48; theory 41–44 strategy: documentation 26, 55, 174–175, 183–184, 220, 223, 239, 244–245, 267, 278–280; making 26, 28, 43, 46, 54–55, 58–59, 66, 172, 174, 180, 184–185, 187, 189, 206, 212, 218, 219–224, 227, 239–243, 245–246, 253, 290; objectives 3, 26, 54–55, 66, 113, 139, 158, 171– 172, 266, 281; plan 56, 150, 159–162, 184–185, 199, 219–220, 245, 253–254, 279; see also circular; partnerships Studio Loafalo 215–223 sustainable cities and communities see SDG 11 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 6–12; SDG 1 No poverty 6–8, 214, 226, 231, 236, 266; SDG 2 Zero hunger 6–8, 231, 266; SDG 3 Good health and well-being 6–8, 53, 58, 60, 150–151, 153, 164, 167, 226, 231–232, 236–237, 245; SDG 4 Quality education 6–8, 73, 77, 80, 88, 102, 135, 142–143, 146, 170, 176, 178, 188, 214, 223–224, 226, 229, 232, 245, 266; SDG 5 Gender equality 6–8, 53, 60, 62–63, 70, 102, 104, 179, 183–184, 188, 266; SDG 6 Clean water and sanitation 6–7, 9, 208, 211; SDG 7 Affordable and clean energy 6, 9, 144–145, 146–147, 208, 211, 267; SDG 8 Decent work and economic growth 6–7, 9, 53, 57, 60, 70, 72, 79, 92, 104, 110, 102, 107, 115, 112, 128–129, 132, 135, 142, 146, 153, 170, 172, 176–177, 183, 186, 188, 226, 232, 261, 266; SDG 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure 6–7, 9, 115, 126, 135–136, 145–147, 193, 195, 197–198, 200, 211, 221, 226, 232, 249; SDG 10 Reduced inequalities 6–7, 10, 53, 61–62, 70, 72, 99, 102, 104, 107, 112, 154, 164–167, 170, 180, 185, 188, 193, 199, 210–211, 232–233, 261, 266; SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communities 6–7, 10, 141, 143, 146, 150, 157, 164–167, 178, 183, 187–189, 193, 195, 197–198, 200, 204, 206, 209–210, 212,

214, 216, 221, 219, 224, 226–227, 229, 233, 236–237, 240, 246–248, 251, 254, 261; SDG 12 Responsible consumption and production 6–7, 10, 107, 110–112, 115, 126, 128–129, 135, 146–147, 150–151, 164–167, 208, 212, 227, 233, 261; SDG 13 Climate action 6–7, 10, 128, 132, 143–145, 147, 154, 177, 189, 207, 212, 214, 216, 219, 146–148, 189, 212, 233, 242, 246, 249; SDG 14 Life below water 6–7, 11; SDG 15 Life on land 6–7, 11, 166–167; SDG 16 Peace, justice and strong institutions 6, 11, 160, 164–165, 194, 212, 236, 242, 244–245, 249, 251, 253; SDG 17 Partnerships for the goals 6–7, 11, 72, 74–75, 77, 84, 107, 110, 113, 115, 126, 136, 142, 146, 150, 152, 154, 160, 164–165, 170, 173, 178–179, 183–184, 187, 189, 193, 196, 198, 200, 204, 206, 209, 212, 217, 219, 236, 238, 243–244, 248, 251, 261 talent 1, 14–15, 54, 58, 63, 84, 96, 99, 132; talent management 58, 96, 99 technology 81, 84, 132, 135, 144, 147, 177, 208; technological development 14, 16, 59, 72, 96, 117, 126; see also digitisation; SDG 8; SDG 9 thermal recycling 128–130 third sector see sector TOMs see measuring social value top-down 3, 17, 19, 35, 55, 107, 113, 154, 162, 238; see also bottom-up training and development 9, 16, 20, 53–54, 58, 60, 62–66, 70, 72–74, 80, 83–85, 87–88, 90, 92–94, 96–99, 102, 108–110, 119, 129, 135, 138–140, 142, 147, 170, 176–178, 180, 186–189, 223, 226, 229–230, 236, 243, 245, 252, 260, 262, 266; off-the-job 72–73, 82, 88–89, 92, 94, 97; on-the-job 72, 88, 94; continuing professional development (CPD) 83–84, 86, 122–123; shadowing 88; see also learning; mentoring transgender see gender Upcyclea 130–131 urban planning see planning value: added; creation; esteem; in exchange; in use; ‘public value’ 30; ‘shared value’ 30 volunteering see charity

304 Index waste see circular water see SDG 6; SDG 14 welfare 18, 27, 29, 33, 54, 262, 265–266, 269 well-being see Health, safety and wellbeing; SDG 3 wicked problem see grand challenge Willmott Dixon 170–189; Foundation 173–181, 184 women see gender; equality of opportunity; SDG 5; SDG 10

work see employment worker see contract workforce diversification 14–16, 34, 56, 58, 66, 68, 99–100, 111, 179; see also managing diversity and inclusion; labour shortages young/youth 8–9, 14–16, 34, 60–62, 68–70, 73, 93–94, 98–99, 111, 135, 142, 166, 170, 173–188, 206, 226–227, 262–264