Gatekeepers can work both ways

Although the vision of the Big Society may not be as fully-formed as some would like, as Geoff Mulgan pointed out in a Times article not long ago, it is certainly here to stay. And despite strong criticisms for some liberal applications of the BS sticker on various public service reform agendas, there are certain areas where the Big Society drive nestles quite comfortably. Given a receding state, one of these has to be the renewed attempt to improve the numbers, reach and overall impact of civil associations and community organisations, from the local pockets of community faith groups to the international reach of Lions Clubs.

Although the vision of the Big Society may not be as fully-formed as some would like, as Geoff Mulgan pointed out in a Times article not long ago, it is certainly here to stay. And despite strong criticisms for some liberal applications of the BS sticker on various public service reform agendas, there are certain areas where the Big Society drive nestles quite comfortably. Given a receding state, one of these has to be the renewed attempt to improve the numbers, reach and overall impact of civil associations and community organisations, from the local pockets of community faith groups to the international reach of Lions Clubs.

If these civil associations are going to be encouraged to pick up the baton for place-shaping and certain elements of service provision, it’s important that we know what makes these civil groups/clubs/organisations tick and what factors make some successful while others remain rather muted. Some groups grow at a rapid rate, some don’t. Some are able to tap into discreet funding opportunities, some aren’t. A paper published earlier this year in the American Journal of Sociology attempts to shed some light on this issue through research with the Sierra Club, a longstanding environmental organisation in the US. The findings emphasised that strong leadership, among a number of other attributes, is crucial in driving forward membership numbers and sustained impact in the community. An attractive balance sheet and healthy political context can only take civic organisations so far - their effect, the researchers find, is far more modest than you would expect. In the end, it is competent leaders who are the ones able to apply those resources, target efforts in the right directions and mobilise members for their cause.

But as much as these characters can be the drivers of change, in some cases they may also end up inhibiting it. More generally, a perception of the ‘usual suspects’ being involved in community organisations puts people off getting involved. But leaders have a far more acute and dramatic effect as the gatekeepers to participation. Some fairly old (although still relevant) research undertaken in rural communities brought out by NCVO’s Pathways to Participation work showed that such leaders, whether they be ones with formal positions in associations or simply well-known local figures, can control access into groups and networks and reinforce the existing status quo, encouraging the exclusion of outsiders. Surely leaders would think that the more participants and members the better. But there are always other factors at play, especially in the more informal and smaller groups. Stability and familiarity, for instance, may be highly valued and not seen to be worth compromising over an increase in new members and a situation where customs might be questioned and new ideas put forward.

Some very recent work undertaken by JRF in Bradford showed how complex the dynamics of community participation and the role of leadership can be. Their research found that these leaders can become seen by the authorities as spokespeople for the whole community, empowering them over everyone else. Or worse, they can eventually become viewed as ‘privileged interlocutors’ with agencies working on estates, demoralising many others in the process and creating barriers towards civic activism.  

Obviously these occurrences are rare but it should be taken into consideration if we are heading down a path where civil associations and community groups are playing an increasing role in picking up where the state left off. It just shows to highlight the importance of acknowledging the complex environments civil associations have to operate in and the adequate training that is needed for leaders of these associations and groups to be adept ‘gate-keepers’; where they are able to encourage and facilitate activism rather than unintentionally hamper it.