I was thinking about the challenges you set up here over the past couple of days - in particular the comment on attracting the most talented.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf (the President of Liberia) has just published her new biography 'This Child Will Be Great' (it's well worth a read). One of the things she points out in the illuminating history of Liberia is that it was settled by freed American slaves who were being - distastefully phrased now - returned home. This was big stuff in the anti-slavery movement at the time and attracted such talent as Benjamin Franklin.
Similarly, some of the iconic socially driven leaders such as Dr Barnardo or William Tuke http://www.historyofyork.org.uk/timeline/georgian/the-retreat may not now be highly regarded for their institutionalisation of destitute children or people with mental health problems.
More recently, special schools and the provision of aid for developing countries has evolved in its thinking and a new generation are leading the response in very different directions. I can see from the current generation of social leaders more people moving away from large charity orgs to social enterprises and entrepreneurial ventures or ones using technology based solutions. It was interesting to read recently that the media now attracts more Oxford firsts than politics.
I think that most - if not all - of the social leaders of the last generation moved in and out of various 'sectors' - I was reading an obit of a former Director of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation who had been, variously, a civil servant (including a European civil servant), at a local authority and later in charitable organisations. I'm sure there are many others. I don't think that the rediscovery of UK poverty led people away from the sector, in fact many of the core academics: Peter Townsend, for example, worked very closely with the third sector in developing this thinking and finding solutions. If anything, re-exposing this scandal possibly attracted more of the brightest people in.
As for followership, I've been thinking for a while that the increasing HR focus in organisations on leadership is blotting out the core skills of management. Leaders we may be, effortlessly inspiring and blending team, but will the generation be able to manage that team to deliver results and drive performance? Maybe something for a future session.
I think you raise a very good point about what we are 'blind' to due to context. Why do the core problems remain intractable? I think the more we see social change led by those affected by poverty / inequality the more we will get to the core of the issue and deliver some really transformational outcomes.
Steve
I was thinking about the challenges you set up here over the past couple of days - in particular the comment on attracting the most talented.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf (the President of Liberia) has just published her new biography 'This Child Will Be Great' (it's well worth a read). One of the things she points out in the illuminating history of Liberia is that it was settled by freed American slaves who were being - distastefully phrased now - returned home. This was big stuff in the anti-slavery movement at the time and attracted such talent as Benjamin Franklin.
Similarly, some of the iconic socially driven leaders such as Dr Barnardo or William Tuke http://www.historyofyork.org.uk/timeline/georgian/the-retreat may not now be highly regarded for their institutionalisation of destitute children or people with mental health problems.
More recently, special schools and the provision of aid for developing countries has evolved in its thinking and a new generation are leading the response in very different directions. I can see from the current generation of social leaders more people moving away from large charity orgs to social enterprises and entrepreneurial ventures or ones using technology based solutions. It was interesting to read recently that the media now attracts more Oxford firsts than politics.
I think that most - if not all - of the social leaders of the last generation moved in and out of various 'sectors' - I was reading an obit of a former Director of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation who had been, variously, a civil servant (including a European civil servant), at a local authority and later in charitable organisations. I'm sure there are many others. I don't think that the rediscovery of UK poverty led people away from the sector, in fact many of the core academics: Peter Townsend, for example, worked very closely with the third sector in developing this thinking and finding solutions. If anything, re-exposing this scandal possibly attracted more of the brightest people in.
As for followership, I've been thinking for a while that the increasing HR focus in organisations on leadership is blotting out the core skills of management. Leaders we may be, effortlessly inspiring and blending team, but will the generation be able to manage that team to deliver results and drive performance? Maybe something for a future session.
I think you raise a very good point about what we are 'blind' to due to context. Why do the core problems remain intractable? I think the more we see social change led by those affected by poverty / inequality the more we will get to the core of the issue and deliver some really transformational outcomes.