So, as quickly as it arrived POPse!, the pop-up social enterprise thinktank has gone away or, as one of my fellow collaborators put it more excitingly, "gone dark". In the run-up to our week of roundtables, reports and research, we ran a poll which asked whether people thought it was a good idea. Broadly, two-thirds thought it was a good (or magnificent) idea, while a sensible third chose "I'll wait to see what is produced..." And now we are at production stage, it's a good time to look back at what went well, what went less well, and whether there's a place for this sort of thing in future.
As a process, it went fairly swimmingly. Space CIC was a great venue partner and we were lucky to benefit from inspired artwork from Jamie Palmer which helped transform the former Subway. Hundreds of people came to events and roundtable discussions, contributed time and thinking, and engaged with the debates. Supportive organisations provided chairs, tables, stationery, alcohol and more. Posts were read, commented on and tweeted around. And, for a loosely organised collaborative, very little fell through the cracks.
The outward-facing aspect of a retail space also worked well, if unpredictably. Whether it was chatting to the pharmacist next door about microfinance, giving impromptu start-up advice to a local social entrepreneur, or just letting those in the area know what we were up to (and what social enterprise was), it changed the dynamics of the work and made it fresh. Three good examples:
• The involvement of two local priests in the Big Society discussion on Thursday, who added unique and provocative insights
• The carer who walked in during the health round-up on Monday and held the floor for 15 minutes
• The kid who cycled in, asked what we did, said "What? So you come up with ideas? For no money? What's the point of that?" before cycling off.
The social enterprise world also seemed to relish the chance to discuss something in a different environment with a different feel; organisations through the doors during the week included National Trust, Deutsche Bank, Big Lottery Fund, UnLtd, Social Enterprise Coalition, On Purpose, Society Media, Clore Leadership Programme, Learning Disability Coalition, Big Society Network, Charity Bank, Middlesex Uni, London Youth, Young Foundation, Fair Finance, OPM, NESTA, NCVO, CDF, DCLG, DoH and many more (acronyms). While there are many of the "usual suspects" among those names, the tone and vigour of the debate, and the mix of participants, certainly felt different to the norm.
That mix of participants is also key to something tangible from the week: new networks, connections and relationships being made. That was true both for those working as part of POPse! itself and also for those who contributed at events and online, and will, I hope, be one of the week's lasting outcomes. It showed that fresh debates and fresh thinking is possible on the stalest of debates if new mixes of people, organisations, expertise and experience are brought together.
What else did we produce? Well, the first reports have started to emerge on subjects as diverse as mutual spin-outs (heaven or hell?), a prospective community "right to manage", what efficiency means, the nature of community today, and the way forward for the Big Society Bank, as well as a post collating the overall top 20 recommendations across social enterprise from the week. Do read them online, then add to, improve, challenge or critique them in the comments (particularly if you voted "I'll wait to see what they produce"). Next, each of the reports will be sent to policymakers, influencers, practitioners and contributors who can move those specific debates and areas of practice on. I think, and hope, that there is honesty, insight, and constructive new thinking in there.
What went less well? I think we could have pushed the diversity and mix of participants further, in retrospect, and gone beyond collective networks even more. We could have been more consistent in letting people know what we were working towards, and what the whole thing was for (I'm not sure it was totally clear if you just dropped in for one event). In retrospect, we could probably have been more provocative too; levels of provocation are a difficult thing to judge. And it's very hard to actually research and write high-quality reports in a busy environment. One former think-tank employee suggested that we were only a real think-tank if we had "piles of failed funding bids" and "vicious internal politics". Happy to say, in that case, that we failed on those counts too.
Beyond the impact of the reports and papers over the next few months, one small sign of success was that people kept asking us "where are you doing it next?" or "when's the next one?" To which our answer is, Batman-like, if the social enterprise sector needs us, POPse! will appear.
What we have learned is that the social enterprise world relishes a bit of humour (see the social enterprise playlist and 100 social enterprise truths), a chance to debate openly and honestly, and a free space to be creative in its thinking. Those in charge of events, conferences and organisational away-days should take note; if we're all heads-down in survival and delivery modes, the future will be something we experience, not shape.
>> Read all the report and posts at www.popse.org.uk
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To join the social enterprise network, click here.
