Dermott Calpin reports on a recent, detailed analysis of applications for the Creative Council programme.
Local government is a sector in flux – open to new ideas, and willing and ready to adapt. The only problem is that most councils still lack the skills and culture to innovate and change.
That, at least, is one of the main conclusions to emerge from a detailed analysis of the 137 applications submitted to the NESTA – the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts – and Local Government Group Creative Council programme.
| Creative Councils Examples of creativity in action... Cambridgeshire CC’s Cambridgeshire Future Transport is a project addressing the needs of people who require support to access public services. In particular, the project is focusing on education, social services, health and community accessibility. We have identifi ed a collective budget of £33.5m across Cambridgeshire’s local authorities and health services which is spent on transport. We are exploring how this budget might be better deployed to mitigate the impact of reduction in public transport and improve accessibility to services. City of Westminster’s Hub Westminster Impact Venture Trust is hoping the Creative Councils programme will help it research, co-design, test and prototype an innovative impact investment fund structure to support start-ups and civic ventures in Westminster’s most deprived wards, where local entrepreneurial talents and ambitions – whether civic initiatives or budding social and commercial enterprise – are held back by a lack of the support networks. Rotherham MDC’s Rotherham Ready is an innovative strategy for developing a culture of enterprise in education. The programme works with teachers responsible for students aged four to 19 to create enterprising and entrepreneurial learning which equips young people with the skills and qualities they need to face the challenges and opportunities of life in the 21st century. It also connects education with business through employer engagement and entrepreneurial role model programmes – inspiring young people about enterprise and the future they can create for themselves |
Among authority types, the greatest level of overall interest came from counties, with 78% applying to the programme, followed by 63% of London boroughs, 58% of mets, 56% of unitaries and 45% of Welsh authorities, but as a proportion, the lowest level of applications – just 17% – from district councils. Overall, the national spread of councils shows strong interest from authorities in the North West, Liverpool and Manchester conurbations, and in the south of Wales and London.
Almost half, 68 of the proposed projects, are described as ‘whole community’, while social services account for just over one-fifth, with 30 applications, while there were initiatives described as internally-focused or for older people both accounting for some 8% of submissions with 11 projects in each category.
Although the organisers had anticipated inviting a final list of 20 councils to take part in the programme, in the end, only 17 – Brighton and Hove, Bristol, Cambridgeshire, Cornwall, Derbyshire, Essex, Havering LBC, Islington LBC, Leicester, Monmouthshire, Reading, Rossendale, Rotherham, Stoke on Trent, Westminster LBC, Wigan and York – were chosen, after a fairly detailed appraisal process.
Catching the wave is a the title of an analysis of all the Creative Council proposals, and assesses their potential for meeting the programme’s stated aim ‘to support local authorities to develop and implement radical innovations which meet the challenges of tomorrow’.
Written by Richard Wilson and Thom Townsend, from the social community networking site, izwe, the study aims to provide the ‘best perspective we have on how local authorities are stepping up to the innovation challenge in the wake of the most dramatic cuts to local government finance in a generation’.
Perhaps the most heartening feature is in the strong interest shown in the programme, and the authors say: ‘The overall picture presented by Catching the wave is one of a sector which is experiencing a surge in interest and will to innovate’. But then, more tellingly, they add: ‘It is ability to innovate, however, where the uncertainty is most prominent.’
To support their view, they describe 58% of the applicants as ‘highly-innovative projects’, with a further 38% putting forward plans for totally new projects, which suggest that most councils have a good understanding of innovation theory.’
However, the real problems appear to set in when it comes to working through council aspirations into practical realities, and they add: ‘There are also signs of a challenge in effectively translating this understanding into impact.’
Only 42% of councils which hoped to join the programme are described as ‘ready to innovate’, and just 27% are said to ‘demonstrate an ability to scrutinise and overcome the challenges likely to be posed’.
Mr Wilson and Mr Thomson point out that this is perhaps ‘particularly concerning’ if it is assumed that those 38% of local authorities which responded to the Creative Council initiative are those with the greatest capability and interest in innovation. Catching the wave concludes by describing local government as ‘a sector in flux’, but also as one which exhibiting classic characteristics of a sector under pressure and undergoing fairly rapid change.
Mr Wilson and Mr Thomson acknowledge that their study offers only a partial summary, but say: ‘The authorities analysed here are perhaps best described as pliable to becoming drivers of local innovation. What we mean by pliable is that they are soft and ready to change form. Like clay before it has set.’
The vast majority of councils are given an amber rating – an average medium-level score in traffic light scoring used in the study –which assesses them against the six headline indicators of – idea quality, appropriateness of delivery model, potential impact, innovation capability, openness to learning and internal commitment to success.
Not unexpectedly, there are some councils which were found to demonstrate ‘high-quality innovation ability’, and others’ applications which suggested only a limited innovation capability. But the vast majority of applicants were described as average.
More encouragingly, what the majority of applications did show was ‘exceptional levels of interest in doing things differently’, together with a ‘genuine commitment to innovation’ across all types of councils.
The vast majority, some 74% of the submissions, had a senior staff member named as leading the project, while 20% had the chief executive or council leader named as the project leader. Perhaps most importantly, the applications also showed ‘a healthy level of explicit openness to support’ in 40% of all projects, rising to 59% in projects rated as having high innovation potential, and only 7% of projects found to be closed to the idea of external support.
Mr Wilson and Mr Thomson say the scale of interest in the Creative Council’s programme is ‘heartening, and it suggests that there is a critical mass of interest, resources and momentum behind the drive to innovate. This augers well that this wave of interest can be translated into a permanent movement for change’. More critically, they add: ‘There are, of course, challenges. A total of 58% of councils are either not ready or demonstrate low levels of readiness, and 73% demonstrate low levels of ability to scrutinise the challenges likely to be faced when attempting to innovate. The overarching message should, however, be that there is a surge of will to innovate sweeping local government, and where there is a will, there should be a way, and because there is high degree of commitment to genuine innovation, and openness to learn about innovation, we should be able to find that way.
‘Key to supporting the transition of the will to innovate, into sustainable ways to innovate will be mainstreaming a culture of learning and reflection across local authorities.
‘This transition will not though, be straightforward. Some authorities which publicly state a commitment to innovate are already faltering in the face of stiff opposition.
‘Other local authorities do not have cultures which have evolved to embrace innovation and change, and many are in trauma following significant staff cuts and restructures.
‘When facing a significant challenge, all organisations have the choice to transcend the obstacles and seek new ways of working or descend and fall back on tried-and-tested techniques and established partners.
‘In short, many local authorities want to innovate, but neither know how to innovate, or are well placed to be innovative.’
