The future of volunteering
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•1,547 views
Helping you to start a conversation about volunteering at your next board meeting
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to The future of volunteering
Similar to The future of volunteering (20)
More from NCVO - National Council for Voluntary Organisations
More from NCVO - National Council for Voluntary Organisations (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The future of volunteering
- 1. THE FUTURE OF VOLUNTEERING A SLIDE DECK TO START A CONVERSATION ABOUT VOLUNTEERING AT YOUR NEXT BOARD MEETING @KARLWILDING WWW.VOLUNTEERING.ORG.UK/ NCVO PUBLIC POLICY & VOLUNTEERING JUNE 2016 SPEAKING NOTES EMBEDDED IN PPT SLIDES PLEASE DOWNLOAD IF THE PICS DON’T MAKE SENSE!
- 2. 1. TRENDS IN VOLUNTEERING 2 See https://data.ncvo.org.uk/category/almanac/voluntary- sector/volunteers-workforce/volunteering/ for charts in this section
- 3. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2001 2003 2005 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 At least once a month At least once a year VOLUNTEERING LEVELS REMAIN HIGH Rates of formal volunteering, 2001 to 2014/15 (%) Source: Citizenship and Community Life Surveys 42% 27% https://data.ncvo.org.uk/category/almanac/voluntary-sector/volunteers- workforce/volunteering/
- 4. WE ARE STILL DEFINED BY VOLUNTARY ACTION Source: Communities and Local Government; Labour Force Survey
- 5. A CIVIC CORE Source: TSRC (2012)
- 6. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 2010-2011 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Volunteered at least once in last 12 months Volunteered at least once per month THE PROPORTION OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO VOLUNTEER CONTINUES TO GROW Proportion of 16-25 year olds formally volunteering 2010/11 to 2014/15 (%) Source: Citizenship and Community Life Surveys 47% 35%
- 7. 3. DRIVERS FOR CHANGE 7
- 8. 8
- 9. 9
- 11. 11
- 12. 12
- 14. 14
- 15. 15
- 18. THE BRAVE NEW WORLD OF DOING GOOD
- 20. 20
- 21. 21
- 22. 22
- 23. 23
- 31. 31
- 32. 32 Monk making Stone Soup Image by Adriao: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7645719
- 33. 33
Editor's Notes
- So, if we’re going to move forward the debate on what ‘gold standard’ transparency’ looks like then I think that we need to move the debate beyond the narrow confines of money and instead think about the broader way that organisations might function or work and think about what being an open, networked nonprofit might mean for them. As a starter for 10, I think we need to debate what gold standard transparency might mean across these 7 domains. And for the avoidance of doubt, lets be clear: gold standard is not a euphemism for more. I cant agree with those who seek to give transparency a bad name by simply dumping data or producing 200 page annual reports and accounts: obfuscation via increased disclosure is a classic strategy that ultimately has the opposite effect to what is needed. Gold standard transparency is about better, not more; it is about data and narrative, about stories and explanations, so that data is not marooned and left to others to explain. Gold standard transparency is about process and how we work, not just counting outputs (or even outcomes), so that our stakeholders can ‘puncture the membrane’, so that they can see inside – a real opportunity given our challenge of public understanding
- Volunteers remain the lifeblood of the sector. And the picture is one of stability: people still want to volunteer Data drawn from the Community Life Survey here – we do secondary analysis on the datasets Currently 42% of adults report volunteering formally (through a group, club or organisation) at least once a year, and 27% say they do so regularly (at least once a month) These rates of volunteering are high and have remained stable over the past decade. Marked increase in young people volunteering, levelling off of ESV after an increase last year. Both youth social action and ESV are areas with real potential to increase, with support.
- Only one in four charities employ paid staff
- This is important: it describes the world as is now, but our challenge is that we are starting to transiton to a world where the millentials are giving smaller amounts of time, not necessarily for the same organisations. Much of my talk is about where next.
- And while overall levels are stable, young people (in the age bracket 16-25 year olds) have seen a continued increase in their engagement in volunteering in recent years
- So: volunteering is stable; young people are socially motivated but volunteer differently (smaller chunks of time; less loyal to an organisation; infofrmal); an ageing population is a huge opportunity as people are faced by years of post-retirement time and an awareness that inactivity isnt good for wellbeing What’s going to drive change in the future? The following slides cover: The changing economic environment Political support for social action Changing social attitudes – esp a desire to know we are making a difference Technology – social action increasingly goes hand in hand with tech We’re all social – and we’re all ‘good’ now – blurring of the boundaries and the need to look in different places for the future of social change
- Figure 2 shows the estimated and projected number of residents in the UK in two age groups, under 16 and 65 and over. There was a decrease in the number of those aged under 16 between 1971 and 1989 from 14.3 million to 11.5 million followed by relatively stable numbers over the next two decades. The number of residents under the age of 16 is projected to rise from 11.6 million in 2010 to 13.1 million in 2031. For the older age group there is a steady increase in numbers from 7.4 million in 1971 to 10.3 million in 2010, followed by a higher projected rate of growth which leads to a increase from 10.5 to 15.8 million between 2011 and 2031. The number of people aged 65 and over is projected to become larger than the number aged under 16 in about 2023. 1.5 million people are aged 85 or over.4 There are now more people in the UK aged 60 and above than there are under 18.5 The number of centenarians living in the UK has risen by 72% over the last decade to 14,450 in 2014.6
- Less likely we’ll have dedicated volunteer infrastructure? Is our infrastructure more likely to embedded in other institutions, like prisons? (I don’t know – but we are acutely aware of pressure on local volunteering infrastructure)
- Social action is where the government is at: this is challenging as it focuses more around notions of reciprocity, not just altruism How do we engage with a govt that sees this as the way forward, that has invested huge sums in NCS, and wants a pathway for young people?
- This is of course the centrepiece of the social action agenda Big enough in treasury accounts to be a department in its own right Worth noting its not the same as investing the same sum in volunteering
- There is very much a focus on service. That’s interesting – a criticism of the millennial generation is that they are too self-centred.
- But volunteering isn’t just about service
- And as our world changes, we need to think about language and communication, and better recognise that what goes on is often unnoticed and not thought of as volunteering
- People want to do good. They don’t care in which sector they do it. So for the time precious, the cash poor, the outcome is the same: if they don’t think that we are using their resource to make the biggest impact, we wont be in the business of doing good. Note this is a relative proposition, not an absolute. It’s no longer good enough to say we do good in the voluntary sector.
- We’re all investors now: shift from altruism to reciprocity and return New breed of social investors: earned not inherited wealth; demand metrics; comfortable with technology and (big) data; want scale and replication These all point to a new wave of doing good based on making a difference
- Organising without organisations has become ridiculously easy If so, are traditiona voluntary organisations still relevant? Will people who give their time see us as the vehicles for giving time? If so, we need to adapt to a digital world
- In a networked society, organisations are no longer the apex; they’re nodes in a network Culturally this is hugely different: how do we lead networks, not just organisations? Is leadership increasingly about the spaces between organisations? How do we put egos aside? And practice is different too – seeding peer to peer networks instead of just being the expert that hands out good practice. A challenge though is that funding mechanisms require orgs to claim individual impact – and what we need to focus on is collective impact.
- Anyone remember this?
- Saw this in Scotland, via the BIVF. Love it. Anyway, this fits with the networks piece – its about recognising that there is spare capacity out there – and well-functioning networks find ways of deploying that cognitive surplus (Probably not very fluently, but I’m trying to argue that the future of doing will rely on deploying spare or otherwise wasted capacity – the offline equivalent to SETI@Home, for those of you that remember the search for alien life and spare processor cycles – and that examples like this enable organisations to do good that is embedded in their normal day to day business.
- Social media surgeries: volunteer led, informal capacity building that uses digital and is an example of how to report outcomes
- The role of platforms – eg Charles Handy’s comments Remember Uber is NOT the future of the voluntary sector (it may be a platform, but its business model seems to be more regulatory avoidance)
- Flood volunteers: interesting because a) its private sector, and b) it uses technology in a way that is useful at a local level, whilst disintermediating local infrastructure. I think that there’s an analogy here with record stores. Would be nice to work this one up – particularly as record stores, and the resurgence of vinyl, show that every big trend has a counter trend
- We also need to think about what scale we are thinking about impact – individual, organisational, societal And how do we blend clicktivism with what we might feel are more impactful, offline approaches?
- I can confidently predict that allotments will be THE next big thing in public policy. I’m calling it right now that we’ll soon have a National Allotments Service. (Thanks to @lewiscoakley for that one) More seriously- this raises the bar in terms of expectations and I fret slightly about our ability to meet these.
- This has been a difficult year for charities in the media Shouldn’t assume that volunteering is immune – particularly if the volunteering experience doesn’t meet the promise
- So, if we’re going to move forward the debate on what ‘gold standard’ transparency’ looks like then I think that we need to move the debate beyond the narrow confines of money and instead think about the broader way that organisations might function or work and think about what being an open, networked nonprofit might mean for them. As a starter for 10, I think we need to debate what gold standard transparency might mean across these 7 domains. And for the avoidance of doubt, lets be clear: gold standard is not a euphemism for more. I cant agree with those who seek to give transparency a bad name by simply dumping data or producing 200 page annual reports and accounts: obfuscation via increased disclosure is a classic strategy that ultimately has the opposite effect to what is needed. Gold standard transparency is about better, not more; it is about data and narrative, about stories and explanations, so that data is not marooned and left to others to explain. Gold standard transparency is about process and how we work, not just counting outputs (or even outcomes), so that our stakeholders can ‘puncture the membrane’, so that they can see inside – a real opportunity given our challenge of public understanding
- See also Creating the Future. And of course the folk tale of making stone soup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Soup
- And of course the folk tale of making stone soup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Soup Some travelers come to a village, carrying nothing more than an empty cooking pot. Upon their arrival, the villagers are unwilling to share any of their food stores with the hungry travelers. Then the travelers go to a stream and fill the pot with water, drop a large stone in it, and place it over a fire. One of the villagers becomes curious and asks what they are doing. The travelers answer that they are making "stone soup", which tastes wonderful, although it still needs a little bit of garnish to improve the flavor, which they are missing. The villager does not mind parting with a few carrots to help them out, so that gets added to the soup. Another villager walks by, inquiring about the pot, and the travelers again mention their stone soup which has not reached its full potential yet. The villager hands them a little bit of seasoning to help them out. More and more villagers walk by, each adding another ingredient. Finally, the stone (being inedible) is removed from the pot, and a delicious and nourishing pot of soup is enjoyed by all. Although the travelers have thus tricked the villagers into sharing their food with them, they have successfully transformed it into a tasty and nutritious meal which they share with the donors.
- We have to seize the narrative: remind people that volunteering and charity is about public benefit, not personal gain or career development; and that volunteering and charities make a difference difference every day