It’s probably best to avoid another lengthy post on the Mark saga but this development is worth noting. The Scottish Social Enterprise Coalition have rebuffed Senscot’s attempts to reject the Social Enterprise Mark and launch a badge of their own.
This doesn’t stop Senscot from going ahead but I imagine it would make it more difficult for them to secure a large chunk of taxpayers’ money to replicate a UK-wide taxpayer-funded scheme with extremely similar aims based on the limited correction of some minor ideological gripes.
While I’m sure the letter from SSEC’s Antonia Swinson is a political fudge hashed out in a committee rather than a meaningful professional opinion, it’s still somewhat disingenuous to suggest that “the robust and sensible criteria” proposed as those for the Senscot Badge “are far preferable to the Mark’s more relaxed approach and acknowledge that the SEM company is unlikely or unwilling to tighten the criteria in future.”
Senscot are robust about seeing profit distribution as a bad thing. When it comes to measuring social impact – social enterprises having to prove they’re actually doing something socially useful in order to keep their accreditation – its Senscot who are relaxed, while the Mark team actually expect social enterprises to demonstrate that their social and environmental aims are being achieved.
The issue isn’t so much the strictness of the overall criteria as it is different ideas about what is important.
Obviously I continue to oppose both schemes equally.