In Richmond upon Thames the population is keen to volunteer, so keen in fact that there aren't enough volunteering positions to fill the demand. Gillian Norton believes this situation isn't rare, and thinks there's more we can do to make the most of the willing.  

Richmond upon Thames is a borough with a vibrant voluntary sector delivering a wide range of services. Some of these are commissioned with a large proportion still grant funded, though over the next two years the plan is to move to almost totally commissioned.

So, there is a great deal of voluntary effort and the desire to get involved through volunteering seems to be growing. The Richmond Council for Voluntary Services Volunteer Centre (funded by the Council) has seen recent growth in the numbers registering. In these straightened times with the withdrawal of the state and hoped for resurgence of community this is surely a good thing.   We are finding that the volunteer marketplace is becoming more complex and volunteers more sophisticated in what they are seeking from their volunteering position.  For example some volunteers wish to carry out a discrete piece of work which will help prepare them for the job market, whilst others are looking for long terms positions.  This increase in complexity is an additional challenge for identifying suitable positions and matching volunteers to organisational needs; it also means that placing volunteers will take longer.

What conclusions do we draw from this? I do not believe Richmond is wholly untypical. What action should be taken to help match volunteers and placements more effectively and who should be taking the action?

I think the voluntary sector has to get better at identifying suitable volunteering opportunities. Do we know which groups are good at this and which aren’t? Can the good practice be shared? Sometimes I wonder if the relentless march of commissioning discourages organisations from a focus on volunteers.  If so what should commissioners be doing about that? Quotas?? I rather hope not though perhaps some specified requirements are necessary.  Volunteers can add value to a commissioned service and commissioners need to be smarter at measuring this type of social impact when procuring services from voluntary sector providers.

A balancing act 

The public sector generally has also to get better at identifying where voluntary effort can supplement paid employment. I know it’s a difficult area and perhaps particularly so at a time of significant public expenditure reduction. If the funds are not available and there are people completely willing to work voluntarily then why shouldn’t we try to facilitate it rather than putting barriers in the way?  

And what about people who get together – almost spontaneously – to make a difference in their locality? They may not be plugged into the more established parts of the sector and may not know that there are potential willing recruits out there. Technology is surely part of the solution – if my teenagers can identify common “friends” in a group of apparent strangers then can like minded souls intent on good works not draw together?    There are lots of ideas and developments which we can draw upon such as Timebanks, social enterprises and even virtual volunteering; we need to look at new ways of achieving the same outcomes which is about bringing communities together and making a positive difference to people’s lives.

But I also have a theory that there are potentially very many more people interested in volunteering who just don’t know how to access the kind of groups they would like to work with. And we make it unnecessarily difficult both as public and voluntary sectors for young people to volunteer. So I think the gap between the willing and the available opportunities could be even bigger than Richmond’s current experience suggests. There is a whole world of opportunity out there. I do hope we can seize it.

Gillian Norton has been chief executive of the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames since 1999