Paper for 5Thuk SERC

Paper for 5thUK SERC

The relationship between disabled people and the commercial sector – moving on from ‘fight and flight’ to access the purple £

A ‘learning by experience’ approach.

Nigel Fenner and Arthur Bate

In this paper we want to explain how we have developed a new rationale for working with local businesses. This is how we are developing our thinking.

We want to move out of what has sometimes been the cocoon of the disability world and recognise that it can, and does overlap with the business world and how that overlap can benefit both worlds without losing the values essential to both.

Background.

In late 2006 HertfordshirePASS (Personal Assistance Support Service) was awarded 3 years of grant aid by the Big Lottery Fund to establish a user-driven project (now called WorkABILITY), enabling students with disabilities at tertiary colleges in Hertfordshire to access work experience. Given its ‘user-driven-ness’, the first 6 months of WorkABILITY involved users sharing, reflecting on, and learning from their experiences of employment and work experience in order to determine the project’s task or purpose. This process was described in detail by the author, Nigel Fenner at the 4th Social Enterprise Research Conference (Fenner, 2007). Currently, having been through 5 modifications, the purpose of WorkABILITY is ‘people with a learning or physical challenge overcoming barriers to work’. The Big Lottery annual targets relating to this purpose include placing 20 students with disabilities per year in employment or work experience, providing suitable equipment (ramps etc) and promoting the results of WorkABILITY.

Given that the Big Lottery funding will cease at the end of 2009, HertfordshirePASS has sought the means, through social enterprise, to sustain WorkABILITY in the longer term. This has been grant aided by the Key Fund (European Social Funding). (The term ‘social enterprise’ has been used in this paper as a descriptive, rather than technical term.)

Ideas for social enterprises have largely come from three young people (one with Spastic Quadriplegia Cerebral Palsy, another with a learning disability and osteoporosis, and the third with Asperger’s Syndrome) and their experiences in delivering on achieving the WorkABILITY Big Lottery targets – asdescribed below:

A work experience agency

In early discussion with a local tertiary college, WorkABILITY was told that work experience placements in local companies for students with disabilities were difficult to find. Whilst the college used tutors and specialist staff to find such placements, WorkABILITY believed that such ‘canvassing’ should be done by young people with disabilities, in keeping with its strong commitment to being user-driven. The results were very encouraging and a number of shops and local companies have signed up in offering placements.

This experience has resulted in ideas to establish a work experience agency (- similar to an employment or recruitment agency), run by people with disabilities, as a social enterprise.

Physical access for wheelchair users

WorkABILITY was informed by the local college that a wheelchair user on work experience with a local kindergarten could not safely join the children in the playground. A company specializing in ramps was contacted and an appointment made for them to visit to make an assessment and ‘measure up’. In addition, a member of the WorkABILITY volunteer staff, also a wheelchair user, was to attend. Whilst the need for only one ramp had been identified, this WorkABILITY staff member, on arrival “saw another barrier. There was a big step as we entered the pre-school….” (Bird et al, 2008). This was then successfully attended to, much to the satisfaction and pride of this staff member, who as a result of this, and other experiences (particularly in local shops), has plans to establish an ‘access consultancy’, as a social enterprise.

Support of people with a learning or physical challenge on work experience

As WorkABILITY has placed students on placements, it has piloted peer mentoring, as well as started to develop a dedicated internet network / forum ( specifically focusing on young people with disabilities starting employment or work experience.

Such a package of support may also develop into a social enterprise.

The next stage for these three fledgling social enterprises ( - which are likely to work together initially) is considered key. Their development up until now has relied on young people with a physical or learning challenge using their own experience of ‘overcoming barriers to work’ to solve problems, sometimes better than the ‘experts’. Whilst this is important, it does not guarantee business success - enough to survive in a competitive market. As a result, HertfordshirePASS recently focused its attention on approaching the private or commercial sector. This, however, was always going to be a challenge given that, in canvassing local companies for work experience placements, the young people with physical or learning challenges reported “employers are sometimes fearful, ignorant, scared” (Bird et al, 2008). In addition they reported a “lack of understanding in employers” regarding disability.

There may be many reasons as to why this might be, however these same young people reported at a subsequent planning meeting, focusing on how to progress the above three social enterprises, “people in jobs might be frightened about a disabled person doing a job”. In fact “frightened” was mentioned on three separate occasions, including in the solution proposed: “We could do workshops in companies to help them to be more comfortable when with people with disabilities…. We could have a day for companies to come along….not to be frightened…”

Whilst overcoming such ‘fright’ in local companies was considered important, WorkABILITY also understood that the key was setting up a dialogue, or “2-way street with local employers” (Bird et al, 2008).

This has led to WorkABILITY exploring what it has to offer local companies on such a ‘2-way street’. Probably of most importance is the ‘disabled £’, or ‘purple £’, similar to the ‘green £’ ( - where products exploit their green, or environmentally friendly credentials), or the ‘pink £’ ( - relating to products targeted at the gay and lesbian community). The ‘purple £’ is estimated to be worth £80billion per year (Massie, 2006), which represents the spending power of people with disabilities who make up 20% of the population.

To test this out, PASS arranged two meetings with senior staff from two local companies ( - one a multinational company, the other a European bank) resulting in them expressing interest, and support. The meetings also explored how a dialogue (‘a 2-way street’) might be further developed with the commercial sector, and two suggestions were made:

More (informal) interaction between (commercial) staff and people with disabilities ( - for example over lunch before a meeting), and

People with disabilities learning and using the language of sales.

The language of sales is not just relevant to the dialogue with the commercial sector, but it is also considered crucial in relation to PASS and WorkABILITY establishing and successfully running its 3 proposed social enterprises. However, given that the language of disability has, over the last hundred years or so, sometimes been used (quite rightly) to fight, battle and struggle for equal rights in society, including the workplace, it may explain why the young people canvassing for work experience placements have found “employers sometimes fearful, ignorant, scared” (Bird et al, 2008). Clearly employers need to learn the language of disability, but WorkABILITY also has to respect and learn some of the language of business.

Given the experiences WorkABILITY has had, both in starting up its 3 social enterprises, and its contact with local employers and the commercial sector, this paper now proposes, through reference to the academic literature, what the next steps for WorkABILITY might be. First it is necessary to briefly outline the model or framework which underpins WorkABILITY, and its user-centred / user-driven work.

A framework for user-centred work with people with disabilities – for social enterprise

So as to ensure that WorkABILITY developed as being ‘using-driven’, the ‘Person-System-Role’ framework (Fenner, 2007) was, and still is, being used. In summary, this used the lived experience of ‘overcoming barriers to work’ of both ‘users’ and those who work with them, as a resource to determine WorkABILITY’s purpose or task. Now that WorkABILITY has been in existence for 18 months there are additional lived experiences of creating and shaping the project to achieve its task. Such ‘learning from experience’ in relation to task is key as managers and staff “need to be aware of the system they are in together so they can utilize their experience to concentrate on achieving the aim of the system.” (Grubb Institute, 2002)

Once the purpose of WorkABILITY has become clearer, it has naturally defined the project’s boundary or limits, so there is increasing understanding of what is ‘in’ WorkABILITY (such as resources), what is ‘out’, and how, and what can cross the boundary.

“The task of any purposive system is to decide where to ‘place’ boundaries which denote the difference between the inside and the outside…..(and) to decide the means and conditions, and clarify the intentions by which boundaries are crossed. Management’s rationale is based on boundary defining and monitoring.” (Reed, 1998).

Such an understanding of task, and boundary for WorkABILITY has led, in turn to a greater clarity of role, and because the ‘Person-System-Role’ framework emphasizes the concept of a ‘person-in-role’, each individual brings their own life experience, expertise and skills to bear in bringing their role alive – to achieve the purpose of WorkABILITY. “We speak of a person-in-role as a holistic notion when the person integrates him / herself into the whole which includes the system, its purpose, the context and the people.” (Reed, 1998).

Such a relationship between purpose, system, role and experience is represented in the basic systems diagram – as applied to WorkABILITY. Refer to figure 1.

Figure 1.

Whilst the reality for WorkABILITY is a lot more complex than the above diagram suggests, it nevertheless represents an ideal the project has been striving towards. However, if WorkABILITY is to survive beyond its funding from the Big Lottery, it needs to venture outside this ‘cocoon’ and begin a dialogue and partnership with the commercial sector.

As WorkABILITY has had some recent experiences with the commercial sector (as described in this paper), figure 1 can now be redrawn, as below - (figure 2).

Figure 2

Whilst the 3 social enterprises described in this paper enable WorkABILITY to continue to achieve its aim of ‘overcoming barriers to work’ ( - through a ‘work experience agency’, ‘physical access consultancy’, and ‘support for students on work experience’ project), the suggested move into ‘exploiting the purple £’, is likely to take it beyond such a remit. As figure 2 shows, ‘exploiting the purple £’ straddles both WorkABILITY, and the commercial sector, so that WorkABILITY’s boundary will need to grow or changeto incorporate it, including the language (from ‘disability’, to ‘sales’) that describes it.Clearly this must be managed by WorkABILITY as “management is the boundary. So wherever there is management, there is a boundary, and where there is no boundary, there is no management” (Reed, 1998). Reed then describes what challenges are involved:

“The problematic of growth is to manage the boundary so that those responsible for expanding the system accept their accountability for the sustainability of its total context in carrying out its own purposes economically, socially and ecologically. This will most certainly question the values underlying these purposes. One consequence is to recognise the rights of all the stakeholders: employees, customers, suppliers, contractors and local communities whose existence is critical, alongside shareholders and investors.”

With WorkABILITY’s commitment to being user-driven, ‘recognising the rights’ of users as ‘stakeholders’ will not be a problem. The same, however cannot yet be said of WorkABILITY’s relationship with the commercial sector, not only because of the relationship’s new-ness, but also because of the perceived attitude and behaviour of ‘employers as being scared and frightened of people with disabilities’. This is depicted in figure 2 as a ‘flight’ arrow taking the commercial sector away from the ‘2-way street’ necessary for any meaningful partnership.

This would suggest that both ‘flight’ by the commercial sector ( - in response to a perception of ‘fight’ in the disability sector?) and ‘fight’ (in response to the perception of flight by the commercial sector?) needs to be addressed first before any work on social enterprise, and ‘exploiting the purple £’ can be done.

According to Bion (2006) in developing his theory of group dynamics, such ‘fight / flight’ is extremely common in any group:

“The group seems to know only two techniques of self-preservation, fight or flight. The frequency with which a group, when it is working as a group, resorts to one or other of these procedures, and these two procedures only, for dealing with all its problems, made me first suspect the possibility that a basic assumption exists about becoming a group….”

Maybe in addressing the ‘fight / flight’ between WorkABILITY and the commercial sector, a further social enterprise will be born? Such an idea has already been suggested by WorkABILITY staff and users, as already reported in this paper…

“We could do workshops in companies to help them to be more comfortable when with people with disabilities…. We could have a day for companies to come along….not to be frightened…”

Who knows, such workshops could also unlock huge potential for exploiting the purple £ - benefiting all?

References

Bion, W.R. (2006). Experiences in Groups and other papers. Routledge.

Bird, A. et al. (2008). User-driven. People with a learning or physical challenge overcoming barriers to work. HertfordshirePASS.

Fenner, N.P. (2007). User-centred work with people with disabilities – for social enterprise. 4thUK Social Enterprise Research Conference.

Grubb Institute (2002). Transforming experience into action through role. A paper on the training of Consultant Leaders for the NationalCollege for School Leadership. Grubb Institute.

Massie, B. (2006). Disability Rights Commission backs Direct Enquiries. British Retail Consortium.

Reed, B. (1998). Organisational Transformation. Grubb Institute.

Fenner & BatePage 117/11/2018