A few themes collide in this edition of G&L – admittedly a situation that owes more to serendipity than any smart editorial planning, I’m afraid. Or maybe that’s simply the nature of our interconnected sector.
The cover theme is a topic that has come into particularly sharp focus over the last year or so, as growing numbers of charities have filed their final annual report and accounts, and hoisted a “closed” sign over the door. But rather than always being perceived as a shameful and indefensible consequence of failure, the act of closure – or other significant ending – is beginning to be regarded differently across the sector. Lessons are being learned from those endings that turned out to be unmanaged, messy and traumatic, so that some leaders are now looking to craft “the end” of a charity’s story much earlier – as an option, at least – than they might have in the past. They are realising that this way, they might stand a better chance of minimising pain and losses, and protecting the mission and the organisation’s legacy.
Such lessons include facing up to the early warning signs that signal organisational distress, rather than ignoring or rejecting them and hoping for the best.
Most individuals who have been party to a major organisational ending tend to agree that while financial pressures usually played a part, they are commonly not the only – or even the main – trigger for a charity’s collapse. Many of these factors are addressed in our cover theme articles on pages 8-14, but more are also covered (serendipitously) in subsequent sections. For example: what transpires when cliques of staff turn on the charity’s leadership (p16)? What risks arise when boards are not hearing directly from operational teams (p23)? And, how does misplaced optimism blind trustees to the need for decisive action (p34)?
Of course closures and other endings are hard, especially in the context of beneficiaries losing valued services and employees losing their jobs. But they are even worse when they are reactive and dishevelled, and erupt into vehicles for blame and shame. So building them in as an option, as part of your regular horizon-scanning, could save a whole lot of pain further down the line.
Julia Unwin
I also want to highlight our exclusive interview with the new Charity Commission chair, Julia Unwin. She needs no introduction; if there is such a thing as an A-list charity sector celebrity, she’s right up there. But in these fragile and frightening times, what a relief it is to have someone of her calibre at the head of the regulator’s board table. She brings vast experience of all sectors, more governance and leadership skills than an MBA graduation party, and a genuine desire to see charities thrive. Plus, she seems to accept that it should be part of the regulator’s role to help the public better understand the sector. Hurrah for that.
