Thanks to everyone who has emailed (or posted comments) on the report so far. The majority have been positive.
One of the valuable things about having a blog is that it offers the opportunity to set the record straight, own up to any omissions, and tackle misunderstandings. This gives me a chance to respond to some of the comments that I have received so far.
First, the report is not an evangelical call for mergers – something that we have been accused of. Throughout the report we say that mergers are never straightforward and should only proceed if there is a strong case. The report shows that mergers can create value for charities and their beneficiaries, but the process also carries considerable risks.
What NPC intends to do is to encourage the trustees and management of charities to ask questions that they may not have asked before and to think beyond the limits of their organisation. NPC believes that charitable purpose and the needs of beneficiaries should always come first. Where there is the opportunity to improve services then a merger deserves serious thought. If, after due consideration, a merger does not seem sensible then it should not be attempted.
Second, we have been criticised for not devoting enough space to discussing the difficulties associated with mergers. It was our intention to make the point clearly that mergers are not a simple solution and always have costs – which are very often hidden. If this did not come across then I wish to re-emphasise it here. But equally I do not want to deflect from the point that merger can and do create considerable value.
Third, one of the emails I received criticised us for not giving enough voice to those smaller charities that have joined forces with a larger charity. Admittedly in the examples in Chapter 2 we did not proactively seek the contribution of the people that were associated with smaller charities before the merger. As the emailer put it to me, mergers are rarely a coming together of equals. When considering a merger both parties should recognise what they have at the outset and what they need to protect. The risk is that smaller charities will lose some of their uniqueness, even if they may also gain a great deal.
Finally, as I wrote on this blog at the start of last week, the purpose of the report is to ask whether mergers can contribute to better outcomes for the vulnerable people that charities seek to help. NPC is committed to helping create a more effective charity sector and that is the spirit in which the report has been written. I also hope that it is the spirit it which it continues to be received.
