Impact case study database

CEEDR research projects have generated impacts on policy and practice in three ways:

1. Informing and influencing government policy to help social enterprises grow in the UK, Europe and beyond;

2. Encouraging start-ups and strategic change to enable the viability and growth of social enterprises through online courses, training, and in-depth consultancy/advice;

3. Influencing support providers to improve financial support and the design and delivery of their services for social enterprise, thus further enabling the growth of the sector.

The Government Inclusive Economy Unit and Office for Civil Society used CEEDR research to develop their strategy for supporting the growth of a particular type of social enterprise - Public Service Mutuals - as part of inclusive growth strategies [5.1]. Our work with Social Enterprise UK has been used by senior civil servants to inform the spending review and strategy for supporting mutuals [5.2]. Recommendations related to how mutuals contributed to innovation in public services were shared and discussed on an ongoing basis, including at key events held by Nesta (2014) for practitioners and policy makers, and at the Cabinet Office (2014) and Office of Civil Society (2018), for policy makers.

The Office for Civil Society contracted CEEDR, in collaboration with Social Enterprise UK, to provide detailed evidence on the strengths of public service mutuals, their strategies for growth, challenges faced, and their support needs. This informed policy and helped refine the support (mentoring and advisory services) provided under the £2.7m Mutuals Support Programme. CEEDR’s ongoing work with SEUK also fed into government consultations on how mutuals are officially defined. A senior UK government policy maker stated: “Insight around the way organisations engage their staff in decision making has been very eye-opening and prompted this set of questions to be included in our upcoming consultation on the future definition of mutuals. Data around profit distribution has also fed directly into the upcoming consultation questions. Additionally, insight into the challenges, which have been echoed in this case study report, are starting to feed into the spending review process and our strategy for supporting mutuals in the future” [5.2].

The Departments of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and Digital Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) changed their methodology for assessing the scale of the social enterprise sector in the UK [5.3], with reference to research involving Lyon and Baldock (now Owen) [3.6] and an earlier Social Enterprise Journal paper by Lyon and Sepulveda (2009), which had identified problems with previous mapping exercises. The revised data has been used by national government to focus support on charitable organisations that have moved into social enterprise activity, and also on a broader group of enterprises that includes a large proportion of private for-profit businesses that emphasise a social purpose or mission.

As an internationally-recognised centre of expertise on social enterprise, CEEDR has provided advice to policy makers from Canada, Norway, Philippines, China, South Africa, Bhutan and Australia. Within Europe, CEEDR research on social enterprise in the UK has been used by the European Commission Social Business Initiative (2011-2020) to develop guidance for other member states on how to create an effective enabling environment for social enterprise [5.4]. This led to CEEDR being asked to make recommendations for further policy changes as part of the evaluation team for the Social Business Initiative.

Insights from our research have been applied by social entrepreneurs to assist their start-ups and by established social enterprises to inform their strategies for growth and innovation [3.1; 3.2; 3.3; 3.4]. Our research findings directly informed the creation of Middlesex University’s Social Enterprise Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) on the FutureLearn platform in 2016, that supported learners to start up a social enterprise or grow existing organisations [5.5, 5.6]. By December 2020, there had been over 50,000 registrations for these courses and 72,683 views of clips made available via YouTube. Participants came from 170 countries, with 50% from outside Europe, and 15% actively participating in online discussions. Evaluation results on the impact of the courses, published in a peer reviewed journal [5.5], showed that after three years 34% of the active learners had founded new social enterprises and 76% (an estimated 1,945 cases) would not have done so without the online course support. Participants reported too that it had helped their job performance (66% of active learners) and career development (25%). Also impacted were a wider group of social enterprises where 79% of all active learners had transferred knowledge and skills gained on the course to other social enterprises.

In addition to the MOOCs, over 70 social enterprises participated in six standalone face-to-face courses on growing a social enterprise delivered by Middlesex University staff for Charity Bank, Impact Hub, and other key support providers. A further 200 UK social enterprises attended workshops on how to grow a social enterprise at 8 sector events. Feedback showed that the courses had shaped how those attending the course thought about strategy in their organisation and helped them develop their own plans for growth [5.6].

A two-year Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) between the social enterprise Holy Cross Centre Trust (HCCT) and CEEDR led to a significant development of their mental health services. An embedded associate employed by Middlesex University working closely with HCCT, drew upon CEEDR research and conducted market research on potential future clients. The social enterprise stated: “The Knowledge Transfer Partnership has been part of an extensive strategic review and organisational redesign workstream that has focused on developing a genuinely social business within the Health and Social Care field. The KTP has been placed at the centre of this organisational change process…(and)…directly influenced the strategic direction of the organisation. As a result of the KTP the organisation has been able to identify and win certain core contracts” (p.5) [5.7]. Changes based on the research made possible a turnover increase of 63% with an associated increase in their delivery of client services. The KTP also contributed to other changes such as rebranding, developing business models for wellbeing centres and impact reporting frameworks to drive strategic change.

Ten other social enterprises used our research on combining social and commercial objectives as part of the long-term advisory/consultancy support provided by CEEDR researchers. One of these, AESOP (Arts Enterprise for a Social Purpose), drew on this research to develop social enterprise business models for delivering health services [5.8]. This resulted in changes to the organisation and the support they provided to other social enterprises, as well as the models being shared at a major event attended by over 100 people, including other social enterprises, health providers and government ministers. AESOP has itself grown, with an additional £2.3m expansion of its programme which included over 1,000 older people and 1,000 volunteers across 63 programmes.

Social Enterprise UK and the Alternative Commission on Social Investment used CEEDR research findings on the significant mismatch of finance supply and demand for SEs [3.5] to inform the establishment of a new Access Foundation. which subsequently distributed £36m [5.9]. The National Council for Voluntary Organisations also used this research in their 2016 report, Understanding the need to take on Investment. Lyon was invited to brief Big Society Capital staff and participate in round-table discussions on the role of subsidy in social investment (2017 and 2018), and led an evidence collating panel for the high-profile Adebowale Commission on Social Investment in 2020 [5.10].

A variety of providers of advisory services, mentoring and financial support have used Middlesex University research to improve the design of their services for social enterprise growth and to promote wider socially inclusive development. The School for Social Entrepreneurs, commissioned CEEDR to evaluate their programmes. Results here were used in the 2016 evaluation report to refine their services for 1,000 people per year, embedding the learning in their ongoing programmes. Power to Change Trust, a £150m National Lottery funded programme where Lyon served on the research advisory panel from 2016-2020, improved their support provision based on the findings of research commissioned from CEEDR. Power to Change stated that as a result of this research (led by Stumbitz) on Health and Social Care Community Businesses: “we’ve launched a Community of Practice [in health and social care] and are investing in this area ourselves. It’s important to have better evidence of both the contribution community businesses can make, and the barriers that hold back growth in the sector” [5.11].

At the time the research was funded, the issue of unpaid wages had been almost totally neglected in employment research within the UK. The final project report was launched at a major conference in November 2017, with over 100 non-academics attending including employers, trade unions, professional associations, regulators, journalists and, lawyers and an address from the UK Director of Labour Market Enforcement (DLME). Further dissemination took place through presentation of findings to the DLME, the Department of Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Labour Market Directorate, the Employment Law Advisors Network and sectoral committees of the union Unite. A widely read project blog ( www.unpaidbritain.org) launched in 2017, which included practical advice for workers seeking to recover unpaid wages, continued to receive an average 60 views per day in 2020.

The increased public interest in working practices following the publication of the Taylor Review in 2017, resulted in the Unpaid Britain report receiving widespread media coverage, including detailed reports by The Guardian of both interim and final reports. Public discussion of the issues raised by the report led to the tabling of an Early Day Motion (EDM 670, Dec 2017), signed by 73 MPs. This stated: “ That this House notes with deep concern the findings of the recent research report by Middlesex University Business School, Unpaid Britain: wage default in the British labour market, that at least two million workers experience non-payment of wages or holiday pay each year”, and called for stronger enforcement on this issue [5.1]. The report led to Parliamentary Questions put by the Leader of the Green Party on 20^th December 2017, and was directly cited in support of a private members’ Bill in a letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 26 October 2018 [5.2]. Clark was also an advisor to Channel 4’s Dispatches investigation into labour exploitation involving room cleaners working in Premier Inns, with the resulting television programme watched by over 2 million viewers.

The originality of the insights of the Unpaid Britain research directly generated further research on this previously neglected topic. For example, the NGO Latin American Women’s Rights investigation of Latin American migrant women in cleaning, hospitality, and domestic work, drew on the Unpaid Britain report to produce findings on non-wage payment [5.3]. Two novel indicators of abuse used in the Unpaid Britain project - the proportion of Labour Force Survey respondents reporting no “paid holiday” entitlement, and the proportion of Family Resource Survey respondents reporting not being given a payslip – were directly incorporated into further BEIS commissioned research in 2019 [5.4], as well as the Resolution Foundation’s three-year investigation into workplace enforcement initiated in 2019. The finding that working, full time students were particularly badly treated on issues of wage non-payment, led to further work by Clark and colleagues on this issue [3.6], leading to the launch of a new employment rights service for Middlesex University students in 2021.

The findings of the Unpaid Britain report informed the actions of a range of governmental and non-governmental bodies, nationally and locally. The report’s recommendation for the need to provide more practical advice and advocacy, with a key role for non-governmental bodies on the issue of unpaid wages, informed the Legal Action Group in the launch of their online employment advice service in February 2019 [5.5]. Local impacts were exemplified by the “Weymouth & Portland Action on Wages” group, partly created in response to the report, whose Chair stated: “The report and its findings made a significant impact on those present and shaped an agenda for action on poverty wages in the area” [5.6].

The enhanced public debate generated on unpaid wages created a context in which the Unpaid Britain findings impacted directly upon government policy and practice, resulting in over 2 million of Britain’s lowest paid workers directly benefitting from improved publicity and enforcement of entitlement to unpaid wages. A House of Commons Environment Audit Committee’s report noted that: “ Researchers from Middlesex University working on the Unpaid Britain project have argued that consequences for non-payment of holiday pay and minimum wage are so weak that they do not present a sufficient deterrent to employers with many continuing to reoffend.” (HC 981, 15 November 2018) [5.7]. Significantly, the Director of UK Labour Market Enforcement (DLME), cited the Unpaid Britain report’s findings in evidence to House of Commons select committees [5.8], as well as in his own 2018/19 enforcement Strategy document. The DLME stated:

“One of my tasks as Director of Labour Market Enforcement is to estimate the extent of wage underpayment. The key source on this issue is Clark and Herman (2017)… Clark and Herman’s £3.1 billion [of unpaid wages] is around 4% of their [workers in the bottom three deciles of the wage distribution] wage bill. The £3.1 billion figure is equivalent to around £470 per worker for the 6.6 million workers in the bottom three deciles. One of my recommendations in Strategy 1 published May 2018 was that HMRC or another state body should have responsibility for enforcing holiday pay. This recommendation was accepted (December 2018). Therefore Nick Clark has had a profound impact on the welfare of British workers” [5.9] .

In 2018, the Government produced their “Good Work Plan” [5.10] which responded to the DLME’s recommendations. Here the government committed to a wide range of policy and legislative changes to create an enforcement system ‘fair and fit for purpose’. It included a number of specific recommendations from the Unpaid Britain report, namely: (1) a government plan to enforce entitlement to holiday pay for vulnerable workers; (2) improvements to entitlement to, and additional information on, payslips; and (3) greater effort to pursue directors “phoenixing’ in order to evade employment obligations. As part of the response to vulnerable workers not receiving holiday pay, BEIS led the government’s major public awareness campaign on this issue in 2019, with officials consulting Clark over strategy design. The resulting holiday pay rights campaign included new guidelines, an online entitlement calculator to make it easier for employers and workers to calculate holiday pay, and an emphasis upon the responsibility of businesses to ensure workers receive the correct pay. Throughout the campaign material, Unpaid Britain’s estimate of £1.8bn in unpaid holiday figured centrally, along with a supporting statement by Clark [5.11].

A further key finding of the Unpaid Britain report was the lack of clarity over which state body had responsibility for enforcing the payment of holiday pay, highlighting the lack of integration between existing labour market state enforcement bodies. This directly informed the government announcement of a consultation exercise, which ran between July and October 2019, to examine the possible merging of existing state enforcement bodies into one fully fledged labour market Inspectorate. Proposals to improve enforcement featured in the Queen’s Speech of 14 October 2019 and are currently under development, so as the DLME observed: “Nick Clark may indirectly have also been a catalyst for such an Inspectorate” [5.9].

Results from this programme of research have been utilised by campaign groups, business organisation, think-tanks and government bodies to influence national and international public debate concerning the costs, benefits and implementation of the minimum wage and LW. The conceptual framework, findings and recommendations of the LW research [3.4; 3.5; 3.6] were disseminated by Werner through numerous public talks and workshop sessions with varied stakeholders including local councils, local business leaders, and campaigning bodies such as the Living Wage Foundation (LWF), which together enabled this work to reach a wide audience.

The principal pathway to impact comprised a range of campaigning organisations, in the UK and internationally, making extensive use of these research results to promote the LW. This led directly to the increased uptake of the LW by employers with its subsequent impact upon employee earnings, and influenced the agendas, actions and policies of other bodies including national and local governments. Campaign organisations routinely used findings from the Putting the Living Wage to Work report [3.5], to substantiate the affordability of the LW, including to small businesses and low-wage sectors, alongside the wider business benefits [5.1]. This enabled them to present a strong business case for adoption by a wide range of employers. It also encouraged governments and other societal actors to engage with and promote the LW in a meaningful manner, as exemplified by the use of findings on the positive effects of LW accreditation to business’ brand and corporate image within a debate on the LW in the House of Commons by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [5.2].

Campaign organisations in New Zealand, the UK, Scotland, and Ireland have all emphasised the importance of this empirical research in strengthening the evidence base for their campaigns to achieve significantly improved outcomes. The Living Wage Movement Aotearoa New Zealand stated: “providing evidence-based arguments has been key to gaining credibility for our Movement… International practice and research, such as Dr Werner and Dr Lim’s work, has supported and inspired us so we are eternally grateful for the work done elsewhere in the world, especially in the UK” [5.3]. The national LWF in the UK widely used these research findings, especially to engage with smaller businesses, local authorities and other anchor bodies that represent local SMEs. A senior manager [5.4] explained the crucial value of “having dedicated research for SMEs on the tangible benefits and real case studies….to demonstrate how [the LW] is possible and important in practise”, and that the research enabled the organisation to engage specifically with SME audiences, “busting any myth that the LW is only achievable/beneficial for the largest employers”.

The Scottish branch of the LWF incorporated key findings on the affordability, benefits and implementation of the LW into their Employer Guide and a HR director’s briefing, used for outreach to employers. The director of LW Scotland observed: “Of particular value has been Dr Werner’s recommendation to implement the Living Wage strategically into business’ pay structure,,,, Currently, 91% of employers in Scotland who become accredited remain so, but one of the top reasons for withdrawal is shrinking of differentials and inability to keep pace with the annual increase. We have included her recommendation in our Employer Guide to Accreditation. We have now accredited over 1,000 SMEs (around 60% of our network) and we are grateful to... her research… as this has helped us to be confident in the way we reach out to SMEs” [5.5].

The process of LWF outreach to employers incorporating Werner’s findings led to a substantial increase in uptake of LW accreditation among SMEs within the UK. In the three years after the report’s publication (2017-2019), 2,326 SMEs adopted the LW in the UK; a significantly higher sign-up rate than the 1,045 accreditations in the three years prior. The number of employees whose pay was uplifted as a result of LW accreditation also more than doubled, from 6,232 (2014-2016), to 13,964 (2017-2019) [5.4].

In New Zealand, the LW campaign organisation Living Wage Aotearoa New Zealand used Werner and Lim’s findings on the affordability of the LW and specifically the use of public sector institutions as lead adopters of the LWF through the procurement process, in a key report that demonstrated how the government could pay a LW in NZ [5.6]: “The evidence in the report was a key plank in [the LW Movement’s] campaign to secure commitment from candidates in the 2017 General Election to a Living Wage. Due to a change of government we were successful and now are proud to have all directly paid workers in the core public service on a minimum of the Living Wage” [5.3]. This change resulted in 2,048 workers benefitting from an average uplift of $3,500 per worker, at a total cost of $7.23 million, with further positive spill-over effects on LW adoption in the private sector expected.

Among other campaign groups that used the report’s findings was the UK-based Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), which encouraged London Authorities to LW adoption by including the ‘business case’ for SMEs in their Guide to Local Authorities published in 2017 [5.7]. One direct outcome of this was the London Borough of Newham becoming LW accredited in 2018, citing CPAG in its decision.

In the Republic of Ireland, Social Justice Ireland (SJI), a main promoter of the LW in Ireland, utilised evidence from Werner and Lim in developing their recommendation to tackle low pay through payment of the LW [5.8]. The SJI report on tackling poverty and unemployment in the EU was presented at a United Nations Expert Group Meeting, leading to support for the LW being adopted as a key policy recommendation by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).

Beyond the influential use of Werner’s research evidence by campaign organisations, findings have impacted upon the organisational development of the LWF and wider corporate practice. Werner’s close working relationship with the LWF involved providing training workshops to promote staff development and build team capacity, via developing their understanding of the potential benefits of the LW and aid communication with employers: “Werner’s research is part of the Living Wage Foundation’s curriculum as part of initial internal inductions/trainings…so this aspect of the LW is acknowledged and understood. This enables team members to have the confidence to authentically demonstrate that paying the real Living Wage is, and has been evidenced, for SMEs” [5.4].

Employer good practice related to the LW has made use of Werner’s research findings in the process of updating the leading benchmarking tool Responsible 100. This tool is used by major firms to improve their socially responsible business practice through reduced organisational risk, enhanced reputation and improved performance. Werner’s invited participation in an expert roundtable in 2017 led to the production of a “ revised and improved Living Wage scorecard”. Based on Werner’s research, this extended the LW component of this benchmarking tool and identified appropriate criteria and scoring in relation to organisations’ need to plan for LW increases, pay policies in relation to interns and apprentices, and LW communication [5.9]. The updated Responsible 100 benchmarking tool has been adopted for use by 225 employers comprising 82 corporations (including 13 FTSE 100 companies) and large businesses, 11 SMEs and start-ups, 24 investors, and 108 NGOs. The benchmark criteria are also available online, enabling other organisations to engage in robust self-assessment.

In 2017, Werner was commissioned by ISS an internationally leading workplace and facilities management company with 470,000 employees worldwide serving more than 60,000 customers, to research the impact of implementation of the LW upon their employees and their organisation. The company subsequently used Werner’s research to extend its “organisational commitment to the LW and demonstrate the societal impact - with the objective of expanding our application of the LW and securing the appropriate funding” [5.10]. The company used the report - in particular the powerful stories shared by employees in the research - to evidence how the LW makes a tangible difference to employees’ lives when in dialogue with customers and potential customers to negotiate new contracts. The company also used the report‘s recommendations as to how the LW should be implemented to maximise its benefits, and its insight that pay was not the only contributor to employee well-being and satisfaction in the workplace, and that flexibility in shift patterns and hours and educational opportunities for employees were important too.

MP and SRH rights are typically portrayed as personal and private concerns within LMICs. Global policy interventions are largely restricted to large businesses in the formal economy, bypassing the majority employed within SMEs and the informal economy, and seen as irrelevant to national policy agendas. Our research achieved impact in this challenging context by: (a) shaping advocacy measures of global organizations on MP and breastfeeding at work; (b) influencing the implementation of national MP and SRH strategies; and (c) improving practice through firm-level responses and building stakeholder capacity.

Engagement with our findings by the ILO, UN, WHO and WABA (World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action), influenced their advocacy on the feasibility of providing MP without harming smaller firms, and the productivity and wider health and social benefits of supporting breastfeeding in the workplace. The MU authored MP report [3.1] remains the only systematic literature review of MP in SMEs and, as an ILO policy specialist observed, “ continues to serve as powerful source of evidence to corroborate the argument of the affordability of low-cost maternity protection measures and potential productivity benefits for employers, including in SMEs” [5.1]. Through shifting perceptions on improved MP at work from business cost to business investment, “MU research has helped to shape ILO’s advocacy messages relating to the need to extend maternity protection to all workplace contexts” [5.1]. WHO [5.2], UNICEF [5.3] and WABA [5.4] have similarly used these findings in their messages and activities to promote MP and breastfeeding support at work.

MU researchers accepted invitations to speak on their findings at global events and policy discussions, subsequently securing contracts as advisors and shaping related advocacy. Stumbitz presented policy recommendations on MP in SMEs and the informal economy at the ILO centenary celebration in 2019. This high-profile event, organised in collaboration with UNICEF, UNWOMEN and WHO, drew a global audience of ILO constituents, EU representatives, senior policy makers, and NGOs, and received global attention through awareness-raising on social media. Stumbitz also represented UNICEF on MP policies and practices globally on its dedicated panel at the 2019 Women Deliver Conference, the world’s largest conference on gender equality.

Through her role as an invited academic advisor to WABA and the Global Breastfeeding Collective (GBC) - the principal global network of MP and breastfeeding advocates, NGOs and international organizations led by WHO/UNICEF - “ Stumbitz’s contributions helped to inform the Collective’s global advocacy focus repositioning breastfeeding as a workplace, gender equality and women’s empowerment issue” [Manager of the GBC: 5.3]. This was reflected in the Collective’s position statement [5.5], which presented case studies from around the world in relation to maternity leave legislation in support of breastfeeding, and included recommendations in relation to the need for context-sensitive implementation and integrated stakeholder working based on MU research findings. Launched at the ILO centenary event in 2019: “the paper initiated discussion on this issue in this global forum and provided it with a heightened profile” [5.3].

Stumbitz contributed to WABA’s work in multiple ways and ensured that: “the challenges of the informal sector are now firmly anchored in WABA’s global breastfeeding agenda” [5.4] and mainstreamed throughout their activities and advocacy messages. Stumbitz was a co-author of WABA’s policy and practice Action Folder in 2019; the key campaigning document for World Breastfeeding Week, organised by WABA. This was published in eight languages, downloaded from the campaign website (which received over 10 million hits) 52,266 times between July-October 2019. It resulted in 788 official pledges for actions to improve breastfeeding support by organizations and government departments from across the world, including from a large proportion of LMICs [5.4].

Workplace MP/SRH policy development within Ghana, Malaysia and South Africa has been influenced by our findings on the need for context sensitivity and multiple stakeholder engagement in its implementation. Our recommendation to address the scarcity of MP research in LMICs [3.1] led directly to ILO commissioned report on MP in SMEs and informal economy businesses in Ghana [5.6]. This identified good practice examples and coping strategies and recommendations of culturally specific solutions to MP provisions at work, particularly those of value to small firms in the informal economy. The MP Steering Committee at the Ministry of Employment and Labour Relations in Accra used our recommendations, along with those of other commissioned studies, in the development of their strategy. These recommendations for progressing MP measures informed the drafting of a MP Bill which extended paid maternity leave in Ghana from 12 to 14 weeks [5.1].

MU research commissioned by UN Women in Malaysia (research project 5) demonstrated the national urgency of SRH related issues. Miles and Endut worked with national stakeholders from government ministries (Health; Home Affairs; Women, Family and Community Development), NGOs, public sector organizations and union representatives to identify a range of SRH-related policies and service. MU subsequently undertook participatory policy-making activities with stakeholder representatives to further clarify and prioritise policy priorities at the level of central government, employers and wider society comprising reforms related to: migration policy; epidemiology to inform SRH service planning and provision; employer obligations for SRH; and reducing the impact of discrimination on women migrant workers’ SRH). These recommendations were detailed in a strategy paper [5.7] which informed the drafting of Malaysia’s twelfth national development plan (2021-2025).

In South Africa, where return to work is a major reason for one of the lowest breastfeeding rates at six months in the world, findings from Stumbitz and Jaga (University of Cape Town) have raised public awareness on the issue of breastfeeding in the workplace through widespread media attention, including national radio and television coverage [5.8]. Collaboration of Stumbitz and Jaga with the Western Cape Government (WCG) has led to the co-development of a more context-specific Department of Health policy strategy. As stated by a senior WCG staff member, this now: “recognises breastfeeding as a multidisciplinary challenge which integrates breastfeeding within the Province’s broader […] gender mainstreaming agenda”. Joint efforts have further included the development of a framework for workplace breastfeeding support and testing of potential workplace interventions within Western Cape Government itself [5.9].

Development and implementation of improved MP and SRH workplace practices in South Africa and Malaysia have actively built capacity through multiple local stakeholder engagement. Alongside employers and women workers, action research in South Africa involved Western Cape government, the South African Clothing and Textiles Workers Union (SACTWU), the South African Medical Research Council. In Malaysia, service development and implementation involved Tenaganita, Reproductive Rights Advocacy Malaysia (RAAM) and the Penang Family Health Development Association (FHDA). Both research streams include train-the-trainer provisions. In Malaysia, for example, 40 women migrant workers were trained as SRH advocates under the ongoing British Council funded research project, to provide guidance and support on SRH practice and further cascade training.

Findings on the affordability of context-sensitive workplace breastfeeding supports have led to the piloting of interventions for low-paid workers in clothing factories in South Africa and the provincial Western Cape Government [5.9]. Initial changes introduced have included the introduction of lactation spaces for staff and the provision of fridges for safe breastmilk storage in all case study factories. In Malaysia, in order to improve institutional responses on the SRH of women migrant workers, Miles worked with NGOs engaged in SRH advocacy to develop the first ‘toolkit’ identifying a range of potential workplace interventions [5.10]. The BC funded project (6) is currently investigating the translation of the toolkit into practice, through evaluation of a number of pilot SRH workplace interventions for women migrant workers, designed and delivered by local NGO actors in a number of factories in Penang.

Lewis’ research has raised the public profile of the significance of whistleblowing, highlighting the public interest in encouraging whistleblowing and showing that this interest cannot be adequately protected by general employment measures. Dissemination and review of specialist findings via the International Whistleblowing Research Network (IWRN) hosted by Lewis at Middlesex since 2008, has contributed to a new public profile for whistleblowing. The growing IWRN comprised of over 200 researchers, practitioners and policy makers from across the world has encouraged networking and dissemination of research and good practice including via regular conferences (Sarajevo, 2015; Oslo, 2017; Utrecht, 2019). In 2014, Lewis, with colleagues, edited and contributed to the landmark International Whistleblowing Research Handbook [5.1] widely read internationally by policy makers, and practitioners. Middlesex University has also sponsored the Whistleblower of the Year Award since 2013, presented to an individual or organisation in recognition of outstanding achievement in making a disclosure of information in the public interest [5.2]. Winners, selected by a five-person international jury drawn from IWRN, have included whistleblowers from Oxfam, HMRC and the NHS, and have attracted considerable media coverage.

Lewis has been routinely engaged by a range of governmental, non-governmental organisations and political parties to advocate protection for whistleblowers, including involvement in Transparency International and The Green Party’s agenda-setting “Directive” on whistleblowing in 2015, through to advising on the whistleblowing provisions in the Labour Party’s Industrial Relations Bill in 2019 and the All-Party Parliamentary Group on whistleblowing in 2020. His contribution through commissioned studies, professional presentations, and evidence to businesses, governments and other bodies, has provided an evidence base for work towards reform, moving from a relative lack of public and political awareness of whistleblowing principles, policies and benefits to the introduction of corporate and legal initiatives in many countries. Impact has been evident in two areas: changed employer practice towards whistleblowers; and the reshaping of legislation internationally to protect whistleblowers.

The former Chair of the Industrial Law Society states of Lewis that: “ His work has influenced mechanisms of organisational accountability in relation to whistleblowing through the introduction of codes of practice and guidelines that directly draw upon his research findings, which have been especially influential on large public and private sector employers” [5.3]. In 2013, the UK's leading online Human Resources organisation Xpert HR, in seeking evidence-led processes towards reform and innovation related to whistleblowing, commissioned Lewis to produce a widely used, comprehensive “Guide to good practice” and subsequent quarterly updates. This comprehensive good practice guide has been extensively used since by Xpert HR’s customers, which are spread across 45 countries, and employ one in four of the workforce and include one in three FTSE-100 companies in the UK [5.4].

A number of recommendations made by the 2015 Francis FTSU Report incorporated Lewis’ findings on defects in existing NHS whistleblowing procedures. Of the 20 principles identified to create an open and honest report culture in the NHS in the Francis report, six related directly to Lewis’s research findings: principle 3, on culture free from bullying; principle 7 on raising and reporting concerns; principle 8 on investigations; principle 10 on training; principle 11 on support; and principle 19 on primary care [5.5]. For principle 20, on enhancement of legal protection, Lewis advised the report author directly on the failure of the law to protect against discrimination against whistleblowers at the point of hiring. UCL Partners subsequently commissioned Lewis to deliver training workshops (2016-2017) on the implications of the FTSU review, which encouraged human resource practitioners to base their own tailored approaches on underpinning principles and evidence. The principles of the Francis review not only shaped major changes in whistleblowing report culture in the NHS (notably principles 7,8,10,11) - the UK’s largest employer of 1.2m staff - but have been widely drawn on by other organisations across the public and private sectors [5.3]. A subsequent study of published procedures used by the FTSE top 100 firms showed how these principles have been widely applied in these companies [5.6].

In 2016, in response to growing public controversy over the provision of a safe environment for whistleblowing in the Garda Síochána, Lewis was contracted by the Irish Policing Authority to review their policy and procedures for the making of protected disclosures. The review’s recommendations identified changes to ensure compliance with the 2014 Protected Disclosures Act regarding who could make a protected disclosure, how to make a protected disclosure, the role of the protected disclosures manager, and employee safeguards. Following consultation on the review, in November 2016 the Irish Policy Authority published a Report of the policing authority on the Garda Síochána protected disclosures policy. This set out 17 recommendations and led to the Garda’s introduction of an amended policy to cover its 15,000 workforce in 2017 [5.7].

As part of work to embed an overall shift of employment culture internationally, since 2015, Lewis has served as a member of the British Standards Institute working party preparing an international standard on whistleblowing. This ISO standard will be the international benchmark for all whistleblowing policies and is expected to be agreed in 2021.

The whistleblowing model Lewis first proposed in 1995 in relation to the UK of protecting whistleblowers via employment protection rights, has since informed the conceptualisation and drafting of legislation and policy internationally, particularly as countries have recognised the value of whistleblowing legislation in fighting corruption. In 2016 a three-day UNODC anti-corruption mission to Liberia aimed at training judges and senior civil servants across 12 West African countries, engaged Lewis as a whistleblowing expert. The resulting Monrovia Statement on Whistle-blower and Witness Protection in West Africa [5.8], jointly drafted by Lewis, was adopted by all participants to facilitate the establishment of effective whistleblower and witness protection systems within these 12 nation states. In Japan, Lewis provided evidence based on his empirical research and expertise on international best practice to a national committee in 2019, as part of an impact review of their 2005 Whistleblower Protection Act. In Australia, Lewis was adviser on the Griffith University’s Whistle while you work project, funded by the Australian Research Council Linkage scheme, as well as recent legislation providing whistleblowing rights under existing workplace arrangements.

In Europe Lewis has worked with particular European states to develop frameworks for whistleblower protection, particularly with a view to tackling corruption. Following Lewis’ address to a major OECD anti-corruption workshop in Athens in 2017, he was commissioned by the Council of Europe as part of the Project against Economic Crime in Kosovo (PECK) to contribute to drafting a whistleblowing statute, subsequently enacted in Kosovo in 2018 [5.9]. The Council of Europe’s “highly positive experience” of engaging Lewis [5.10] led them to further commission Lewis in 2020 to produce two technical reports in support of action against economic crime in North Macedonia. These reports informed major revisions of existing legislation to enhance the protections provided to whistleblowers in Northern Macedonia. A resulting draft law is currently undergoing Parliamentary review with expected adoption in early 2021 [5.10].

The impact of Lewis’ expertise and advocacy is most notable through his contribution in pushing the EU to adopt a whistleblower protection Directive, overcoming opposition from those who argued there was no legal basis or political will for such a measure. Previously in 2011, in oral and written evidence to the Budgetary Control Committee of the European Parliament, Lewis had urged the introduction of EU-wide whistleblowing measures. In 2017, he was called on as one of two academic experts to advise during the consultation process, including participation in the DG Justice workshop in Brussels shaping the Directive [5.11]. In 2019, Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law, was adopted. Prior to this Directive, there was no EU measure devoted solely to whistleblowing. The Directive draws directly on Lewis’ body of research, which demonstrates the need to set detailed standards for handling concerns, offer wide access to whistleblowing procedures, ensure confidentiality, provide effective deterrents to retaliation, and access to justice. The Directive provides minimum standards for all member states and requires member states to put in place relevant legislation. The Directive was transposed in December 2021, with member states now consulting and drafting national legislation on their whistleblowing practices and procedures. Beyond direct impact on the 446 million population of the 27 EU member states, the Directive will have a further effect on countries wishing to join or trade with the EU. The 47 Council of Europe countries have been formally urged to comply with this Directive, and several have taken steps to do so, including North Macedonia and Kosovo, as advised by Lewis.

The impacts evident from this body of work are of two main kinds: benefits as a result of the enhancement of NHS policy and contracts; and benefits to individual NHS employees brought about by implementation of the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES).

Prior to 2013, tackling race discrimination in the recruitment, development and treatment of the NHS, workforce of 1.2 million was overwhelmingly devolved to NHS Trusts and other local NHS bodies. Publication of The Snowy White Peaks of the NHS [3.4] had a pivotal impact on debate, through identifying the scale of race discrimination within the NHS and suggesting ways of addressing this issue. The report was sent to every NHS Trust by NHS England as recommended reading and then became required reading on all NHS Leadership Academy courses. Commenting on the report’s influence, the

former Chair of NHS Providers stated: “I have seen many reports like this over the years and none have had the traction achieved by this report. It has been the trigger for tackling unfairness robustly. I still hear people referring to the report specifically which is remarkable after nearly 5 years and with the sheer volume of NHS policy during that period.” [5.1]

Influence of the report was extended when Kline was commissioned to design a Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) that imposed a contractual requirement for NHS service providers to collect, analyse and publish WRES data alongside an Action Plan, setting out how they would reduce identified patterns of race discrimination [5.2]. On this phase of the work, the former Chief Executive Officer of NHS England stated: “The Snowy White Peaks of the NHS (2014) and the resulting development of the Workforce Race Equality Standard (in which Roger [Kline] was centrally involved) from 2015 onwards, played a crucial role in focussing NHS organisations on the importance of tackling race equality in NHS organisations. It triggered numerous positive initiatives in NHS trusts and other NHS organisations across the NHS which started to help to reduce some of the discrimination.” [5.3]

The combination of data analysis and Action Plan became an essential component of the quality regulator’s (Care Quality Commission - CQC) public assessment of the quality of Trusts’ leadership. In 2017, the CQC set out how WRES would be integrated into hospital inspections. The former CEO of the CQC stated that: “ development of the Workforce Race Equality Standard from 2015 onwards played a crucial role in prompting the Care Quality Commission… to include inspecting against the implementation of the WRES as an element in determining whether an NHS provider was “well-led” or not. Roger Kline’s work enabled us to take this decision” [5.4]. The Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG) Improvement and Assessment Framework made it a requirement for CCGs to give assurance to NHS England that their providers were implementing the WRES, and that WRES results and action plans must be part of contract monitoring and negotiation between CCGs and their respective providers [5.5].

Following the 2015 launch of the WRES, Kline was seconded on a part-time basis as joint director of the WRES (2015-2017) to oversee its implementation. In this way his research directly informed the analysis and drafting of the first two annual reports on progress in implementing the WRES (2016, 2017), which enabled NHS organisations to understand their own metrics and to benchmark them against neighbouring or similar employers in order to drive progress. In 2018, NHS England chose to invest £1 million a year to extend the WRES programme to 2025. A dedicated WRES team of 7 staff currently manage this application of Kline’s research insights and findings. An independent report evaluated implementation for the first two years (2015-2017), confirming early progress on metrics and the impact on improving diversity on NHS boards (Dawson et al. 2019) [5.6].

Implementation of WRES has produced a number of significant outcomes:

Over the first four years (April 2015 – April 2019), four of the nine indicators showed statistically significant improvement, notwithstanding that embedding these changes will inevitably take longer. The number of BME nurses and midwives in more senior grades (Bands 6-9) increased in the first 4 years (2015-2019) by at least 4,000 more than predicted by annual trends prior to 2015, and the numbers promoted in each year more than doubled. There was also a reduction, during the same period, in the relative likelihood of White staff (compared to BME staff) being recruited from shortlisting from 1.57 to 1.45. The total number of BME staff at very senior manager (VSM) pay band increased to 143 in 2019, up by 30% from 2016 and BME members of NHS Trust Boards rose from 7.0% to 8.4% in 2017-2019 (earlier Board figures are not directly comparable) [5.7]. Kline has sustained this progress through influencing practice via high profile and widely read blogs for the British Medical Journal [5.8] and ongoing work with the NHS as a part-time joint inclusion adviser to the NHS national talent management programme, In 2020 he was appointed a member of the Expert Group advising on the production of an ethical framework for COVID-19 testing for NHS workers, commissioned by the Department of Health and Social Care, and invited to become a member of the NHS BAME Clinical Advisory by the NHS Chief People Officer.

The highlighting through WRES data of the disproportionate disciplining of BME staff led to a new approach to concerns about capability and conduct by inserting an additional layer of accountability prior to any form of investigation. This was intended to reduce both the overall level of disciplinary action and the relative likelihood of BME staff being disciplined. Impact of this measure was reflected in subsequent improved WRES data reporting on WRES Indicator 3. Early implementation at England’s Barts Health NHS Trust of a new protocol in response to this measure led to a substantial reduction in disciplinary cases and a reduced relative likelihood of, BME staff (compared to White staff) being disciplined; an initiative that was recommended for wider application by NHS Resolution in 2019, as part of promoting innovative interventions. Nationally, the relative likelihood of BME staff entering the formal disciplinary process compared to white staff has reduced year-on-year, from 1.56 in 2016 to 1.22 in 2019 [5.7].

NHS professional regulators have focused more on equality as a result of embedding the WRES metrics. The Nursing and Midwifery Council changed its Fitness to Practice strategy to stress explicitly the importance of race equality. The former Director of Fitness to Practise, Nursing and Midwifery Council said of this development: “The [Middlesex] work … has significantly influenced the determination of the Nursing and Midwifery Council to address this issue and shaped some of the elements of our recent (2018) Fitness to Practice strategy which explicitly acknowledges the importance of the issue of discrimination in patterns of referrals” [5.9]. He goes on to say: “ I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that you’ve [Kline] helped ‘move the dial’ on equality for the whole health & care sector. In response to Kline and Atewologun’s 2019 review for the General Medical Council (GMC) [3.7], which identified the reasons why some doctors - notably BME doctors - were disproportionately referred within their own Fitness to Practice process, all of the report’s recommendations were accepted by the GMC and a comprehensive implementation programme is currently underway. Evidence provided by Kline in a commissioned study for the Professional Standards Authority (2018) also significantly influenced their adoption of a new standard on diversity, which has led all NHS professional regulators to a fresh review of their approach to race equality [5.10].

Kline's 2013 report, Bullying: the silent epidemic in the NHS, and the subsequent Snowy White Peaks of the NHS report, identified that NHS bullying particularly impacts on BME staff. This directly influenced the inclusion of a substantial section on the disproportionately poor treatment of BME whistleblowers in the Government-commissioned Freedom to Speak Up Review (Francis 2015). Subsequently, NHS Improvement has drawn on this and Kline and Lewis’ analysis of the financial cost of bullying to the NHS and its £2.3 billion cost per annum], in the production of a new toolkit to promote cultures of civility and respect in the NHS [5.11]. This includes a ‘bullying cost calculator’ based upon Kline and Lewis [3.6] (2018), and forms part of a major anti-bullying policy initiative. Kline was also invited to join the NHS Health and Wellbeing Expert Advisory Board in 2020, to advise on bullying, whistleblowing and race discrimination and the NHS Improvement Culture Transformation Advisory Group.

A number of significant investment policy and programme impacts resulted from CEEDR’s research findings. These impacts have been principally in the UK but also extended to the EU, through the European Angels Fund, and Owen’s current advisory role on the design of South Africa’s new Sovereign Innovation Co-Fund. Impacts of this evidence base are apparent through the: (i) expansion in scale and scope of public co-finance venture capital to meet SME early-stage funding gaps; (ii) creation and development of innovative SME finance schemes to ensure maximum positive impact.

(1) Expansion in the scale and scope of public co-finance venture capital

In 2013, CEEDR, working in collaboration with SQW, were commissioned by the GLA to research the provision of finance to SMEs in London. The resulting report, SME Finance in London, identified a Series A finance gap for potential high growth (PHG) SMEs and recommended the creation of a co-investment fund and the targeting of digital technology companies [5.1], with the results presented to London’s Deputy Mayor. The London Co-Investment Fund (LCIF), subsequently established in 2014, drew directly upon the findings of this research. A GLA official stated that this research discovered: “ a significant gap [in finance] and identified areas for potential public intervention and highlighted some potential areas of focus. This evidence was crucial in making the case for a publicly-backed finance initiative for SMEs which was subsequently developed and agreed by the LEP and the Mayor” [5.2]. The LCIF has since fully invested its £85m fund (£25m public funding), targeted at early-stage science and technology businesses, providing funding to 129 innovative PHG digital/technology SMEs by 2019.

CEEDR’s reputation for research into SME finance led BEIS/BBB to commission CEEDR in 2014 to lead evaluations (in conjunction with BMG, Lewis and Mason), of the UK’s flagship early-stage SME PHG innovation co-finance programmes: the £450m Enterprise Capital Funds (ECFs) and the £100m Angel Co-Fund (ACF) [5.3]. The evaluation of the ECF’s £450m public-private co-financing demonstrated positive additionality and demand for larger-scale follow-on funding, especially above £2m. These evaluations recommended boosting ECF follow-on investment capacity to optimise benefits and led directly to additional programme funding. The process of ministerial review between BEIS and the Treasury in 2014 was strongly influenced by these findings. A BBB official stated: “ The evaluation has directly supported additional programme funding.  At Budget 2017, the Government committed to maintaining the ECF programme with up to £1bn of commitments over the next 10 years.  Key data used from the reports include information on finance additionality, company size and growth potential, as well as the role of the funds in addressing market gap” [5.4]. In total, the UK Treasury used this data to obtain an additional £1.4bn public funding commitment over 10 years; a near quadrupling of the first 8 years of ECF funding. To date, this has led to the creation of 31 funds, including 16 new VCs to the UK market, and £1.36bn investment in over 550 SMEs.

Findings from CEEDR’s Early Assessment of the UK Innovation Investment Fund identified the UK’s widening innovation patient capital gap. Alongside findings from the ECF evaluation, BEIS used this as key evidence in favour of raising the EU state aid cap from £2m to £5m per company per annum; a change agreed in 2014 [5.4]. Within the CEEDR-led evaluations of the Enterprise Capital Funds and Angel Co-Investment Fund, major regional disparities in VC funding across the UK were identified. This prompted the BBB and angel networks to seek to develop a greater regional presence, leading to the BBB subsidiary British Business Investments establishing the Regional Angels Programme in 2018 [5.4; 5.5].

(ii) Creation and development of more effective innovative SME finance schemes

The identification of the importance of business investment readiness in how effectively SMEs made use of finance led to Owen and SQW working in active collaboration with Oxford Innovation’s (OI) business finance advisors from 2016, to improve their understanding of the market segmentation of SME finance and growth within their support programmes. This work directly informed the design of OI’s ERDF funded Access to Finance (A2F) programme for Cornwall, established in 2017, which had assisted 877 SMEs by 2018. The CEO of Oxford Innovation stated: “This has been a very helpful collaboration and the resultant [ERC] report [2016] has been used to inform the design of the new Financial Readiness Project that is being funded by DCLG to provide services to 550 businesses to enable them to identify and secure appropriate finance to grow their business” [5.6].

Ongoing government concern over how access to finance for innovative PHG SMEs might be constraining their growth, led BEIS to commission CEEDR to produce a report entitled the Innovative Firm’s Journey to Finance [5.7]. This identified the disconnect between UK grants and private investment and the widening UK patient capital gap report and recommended tackling this through encouraging seed to Series A private VC investment. Following submission to the Treasury Patient Capital Review (2017), its findings were subsequently used by UKRI (Innovate UK) to inform the establishment of the £50m Investment Accelerator Pilot (IAP) in 2017. The IAP sought to overcome the disconnect identified in the CEEDR report through matching seed VC to IUK grants. UKRI testimony [5.8] stated the Report was: *“...key in providing some of the evidence to support the initial pilot. The Report outlined a number of structural issues with patient capital... The critical importance of grant funds for early stage was acknowledged, as well as the problems of achieving sufficient… matching funding… this suggested a need for improved grants and matching funding.” * UKRI subsequently commissioned CEEDR/SQW, to evaluate the IAP. Findings from this ongoing evaluation were used to justify the further expansion of this programme (to £75m), notably through co-financing with regional angel investor networks, as for example in South West England.

Research led by Owen with CEEDR colleagues, played a leading role in setting the policy agenda on low carbon innovation finance for SMEs [5.9]. Results of the Innovative Firm’s Journey to Finance report, together with earlier findings from evaluations of the Enterprise Capital Funds and Angel Co-Investment Fund, were influential in helping Clean Growth Investment Management (CGIM) establish the BEIS Clean Growth Fund in 2020. A managing partner of CGIM stated the key role of these publications “... in making the case for addressing the cleantech innovation patient capital gap at Series A stage in the UK. They also provided guidance for best practice operation and scale for public-private co-financing VC funds” [5.10] . This new £40m fund has the potential to grow to over £100m when private funding is further raised. CGIM will draw upon research led by Owen on the role of environmental metrics [5.9] in their selection of the best business cases presented by early stage Cleantech SMEs seeking access to the BEIS Clean Growth Fund.