LSF EVALUATION BULLETINSNAPSHOT

SURVEY 3

July 2017

This bulletin presents the findings from the third LSF snapshot survey, which explored grant
holders experiences of their business partners. Many thanks to all 105 grant holders who
responded to this snapshot survey online, which is a response rate of 41%. This was down
from the second snapshot survey, where 129 replied (49%). The survey included ten
questions, one of which was an open question which will be analysed separately.

Overall success of the business partner role

Respondents were asked to rate the success of the business partner role within their LSF
project so far out of ten. The average score of 6.6 is lower than the average score of 8.8 that
grant holders rated their LSF advisor in the second snapshot survey. Respondents were also
asked to rate the importance of this role to the success of their LSF project again the
average score of 6.1 was lower than the average of 8.9 for LSF advisors. Within these scores
there was notable variation between the highest and lowest scores provided (the standard
deviation, which provides a measure of how many points of variation there was, was 2.4 for
success and 2.5 for importance). We would expect some variance on a scale of 1-10, but this
nonetheless indicates that the business partner role was working well for some grant
holders, and less well for others.

Recruitment of business partner

The vast majority of business partners were from the private sector (79%), with 14% from
the voluntary sector and 8% from the public sector. They operate in a wide range of
different industries with the most common being finance (19%), education (10%),
information and communication (9%), and human health and social work activities (6%).

Over a third of grant holders did not know the approximate income of their business partner
and so the results should be treated with a degree of caution. However, nearly half (47%)
reported it to be 10m+, with 25% saying between 1,000,001 and 10,000,000, 20%
100,001 - 1,000,000, and only 4% saying it was less than 100,000.
LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

More than four-fifths (81%) of business partners were already known to the grant holders.
Just over a fifth (23%) proactively searched for their business partner and just under a fifth
(19%) had them recommended to them (it is important to note that some grant holders had
more than one business partner so may have utilised multiple recruitment methods). The
self-rated success of the relationship was higher when the business partners were already
known to the grant holder (6.9 compared to 6.6) suggesting it could be challenging for
organisations to recruit a new business partner and develop a successful relationship as part
of LSF. It is possible this was related to the timescales involved during the project, as will be
discussed later in the bulletin in the analysis of the open question.

Recruitment method Percentage

(n=102)

They were already known to us 81%

We proactively searched for them 23%
They were recommended to us 19%
A competitive selection process 1%

We invited written applications 1%

A formal interview process 0%

The business partner role

The involvement of business partners did not closely match the distribution of different
types of project within LSF broadly (see the Understanding grant holders and their LSF
projects bulletin). Indeed, the involvement of business partners in developing income
streams was lower than the focus on income of LSF projects generally. Over half were
involved in strategic planning / thinking (54%) with a similar proportion offering general
support (53%). Interestingly, two fifths (41%) were offering support to develop marketing
and over a third (36%) to develop partnerships; one of the least common areas of focus for
LSF projects generally. This may suggest the presence of differing perception of priorities
between the grant holder and the business partner in terms of organisational need; we will
investigate this issue further in our analysis over the summer but it may also potentially
indicate the value of having an external, different perspective, or alternatively raises issues
of a mismatch between the need and the support provided.

2
LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

Business partner role Percentage

(n=105)

Strategic planning/thinking 54%

General support 53%
Develop marketing 41%
Develop partnerships 36%

Develop new income streams new products or services 29%

Develop existing income streams 17%
Develop new income streams new funders 14%
Other (please specify) 31%

Interestingly, where business partners were offering general support the average score for
the success of the relationship was slightly lower than for other, more specific, forms of
support.

Business partners were offering support in a range of different ways although the majority
offered support through meetings (57%). Regular meetings and attending events were also
linked to the highest scores for success of the relationship whilst a third (33%) of business
partners were placing their staff as volunteers with the grant holder, suggesting that grant
holders were gaining particular value from face-to-face forms of support. Interestingly, a
third (31%) were offering gifts in kind such as free rooms and computer software and just
under a third (28%) were offering training.

Nature of support Percentage

(n=104)

Regular meetings 57%

Attending your events 38%
Their staff volunteering at your organisation 33%
Gifts in kind e.g. free rooms, computer software 31%

Training your staff or volunteers 28%

Other (please specify) 28%

3
 LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

Challenges faced with the business partner role

The most significant challenge faced by organisations was the lack of time that the business
partners could offer, with 36% seeing this as very challenging. The second most significant
challenge has been the grant holder simply not being able to develop meaningful
volunteering opportunities for the business partner, potentially suggesting that support
could be offered to organisations to think through how to develop such opportunities.
Another interesting challenge identified was that the relationship was seen as individual
rather than organisational, which meant that if one of the individuals left, the relationship
was likely to break down.

The impact of these challenges was reflected in the success scores that grant holders gave.
The average score for those that rated lack of time that the business partner can offer as
very challenging was 5.3 compared to 8.1 for those that found it not at all challenging.
Similarly, those who rated not being able to develop meaningful volunteering opportunities
for the business partner as very challenging was 5.5 compared to 7.6 for those that found it
not at all challenging. Finally, those who the relationship being too reliant on individual
relationships as very challenging was 5.4 compared to 7.7 for those that found it not at all
challenging.

Challenge faced (n=105) Very Moderately Not at all

challenging challenging challenging
Lack of time that the business partner can offer 36 49 19
Not being able to develop meaningful volunteering 28 37 34
opportunities for the business partner

The relationship being too reliant on individual 28 34 36

relationships

Not being able to recruit a business partner 9 19 72

Lack of clarity over the business partner role 7 45 51

Culture clash between your organisation and the 5 21 71
business partner

4
LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

The relationship in grant holders own words

The survey also included an open question which allowed grant holders to describe the
relationship with the business partner. Below is a brief summary of some of the main points
emerging from this question, much of which reiterates the findings outlined above.

Varied experience of impact

Many grant holders discussed positive impacts of working with their business advisor,
describing meaningful relationships that had been established:

The Business Partner is a vital member of the Working Group and brings an
independent and different perspective to the LSF Project offering alternative ideas for
long term sustainability.

This is enabling us to engage in local business networks in the way that we have long
identified that we need to but until now have not had the capacity for.

We have found the business partner aspect of the LSF project extremely beneficial. It
has transformed our approach to fundraising, and identified gaps in our knowledge
that we are now working towards developing.

However, others noted that impacts could be more limited and that the role of the business
partner should not necessarily be exaggerated, sometimes because the relationship was
only one part of the wider work:

[It is] purely an advisory role and does not significantly impact on the outcome of the
project.

These modest expectations have been met and neither side is disappointed that the
results of our cooperation are not earth shattering.

Whilst we have a good friendly relationship with our business partner we envisaged
they would be a critical friend and support us with their expertise in the business
world. In reality they are an observer, attending meetings with little constructive and
robust input, direction or feedback.

Lack of capacity
Echoing earlier points about the time involved, the most common challenge described in the
open question was the lack of time on behalf of the business partner:

5
LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

Our Business Advisors are passionate and really want to help and contribute to our
project but they simply don't have the capacity and naturally the demands of their
business must take priority.

This could be because they had the pressures of their day job and their work with the
charity was not of sufficient priority, but could also be, as one grant holder noted, that the
business partners organisation was undergoing a restructure. In some instances it also
appeared to be linked to a lack of clarity about the commitments involved at the start of the
relationship (it was not necessarily clear whether this was due to programme design or
grant holders and business partners not having clear conversations at the start), which were
not, therefore, delivered to the expectations of the grant holder:

It has been challenging in actually getting them to fulfil the commitments agreed.

Lack of capacity could also be an issue for the grant holder, with some noting that working
with a business advisor could take a significant amount of time, which in some cases was
more than the organisation was able to or wanted to give; in one instance this was because
the grant holder was focused on short-term survival.

Limited understanding
Some grant holders noted that their business partners, whilst committed and enthusiastic,
did not necessarily have a good understanding of the voluntary sector, their organisation, or
their clients, and impact was therefore limited. As was noted earlier, the majority of
business partners were known to the grant holders beforehand, which could potentially
increase but not guarantee the likelihood of the business having a good understanding
of the voluntary sector and of the organisation. It was not clear from this analysis, however,
whether previous relationships had an effect here, although it is something we will continue
to explore in the evaluation.

Developing new relationships

Several grant holders described the challenge of a short timescale to identify their business
partner, which in some cases was linked to recruiting a partner that was not a good match:

Finding a business partner was difficult. We accepted the first business partner that
agreed to work with us, due to the time constraints of the application. In hindsight,
this was a mistake and we should have been more discerning.

Equally, a challenge could be created when the business partner left their organisation and
could not necessarily easily be replaced despite attempts by the grant holder:

6
LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

We have issue with one business partner - our contact left the organisation and then
replacement contact also left the organisation. We now have agreed to work
together and move forward at the 11th month of the project.

Subsequently several grant holders reported that they had changed their business partner
over the funded period and developed new relationships. This tended to be a positive move
for those involved, with such organisations describing a considerably more positive
relationship than with their initial partner:

This has worked out much better as we have found a partner with more specific skills
to the ones we needed in the development of both financial and operational
sustainability.

In some cases the relationship with the business partner was maintained but grant holders
had developed multiple relationships with different partners, sometimes on a less formal
basis. Some had seen, therefore, the initial relationship as kick-starting their wider work
with businesses.

Developing longer-term relationships

Several organisations reported seeing the relationship with their business partner as long-
term, aiming to extend beyond the life of the project to become an on-going relationship:

These partnerships have the potential to bring long-term support and engagement
and access to new networks and contacts.

Some organisations reported that more permanent relationships had already begun to
develop, including the business advisor becoming a trustee of the charity in two cases, and
in another becoming a member of paid staff.

It is possible this could be because some impacts of the relationship could take time to
develop, as several organisations reported, that it could take a long time to recruit the
business partner, or that some organisations changed their business partner and developed
new relationships.

Further thoughts
Thank you again for responding to the third snapshot survey, which has provided some very
rich data on your relationships with your business partners and the kind of factors that can
contribute to its success. We will continue to analyse the business partner relations as an
important aspect of the LSF programme through our case study work and analysis
throughout the rest of the summer and autumn.

7
LSF EVALUATION BULLETIN: SNAPSHOT SURVEY 3

Please do feel free to share further thoughts with us directly (please email
nick.ockenden@ncvo.org.uk) or through the online forum, where this bulletin has been
posted.