The case for Relational Welfare

November 12, 2012 3:01 pm

By Hilary Cottam

80% of jobs available in Britain are never advertised but filled by word of mouth – if you want to get a job you need a social network.  Loneliness has proven to be a bigger killer than a lifetime of smoking – if you want to live long and well, you need strong social bonds.  Diabetes, obesity, it is the same story: chronic disease accounts for 80% of hospital costs yet our industrial medical system cannot cure or prevent these conditions.  Only strong collective action and social support work.  Everywhere in our social lives the case for Relational Welfare is becoming apparent.

Now, when much of what previously looked so solid – economic stability, functioning democratic institutions, infinite resources – seems to have melted in more ways than one, people are asking new and different questions, to which the ideas behind Relational Welfare offer answers for three key reasons.

Firstly the nature of the problems the welfare state is trying to solve have changed.  Challenges such as ageing, chronic disease, climate change and the scale of entrenched inequality were not foreseen when our current welfare services were designed.  There is a mis-match between these challenges and the institutions and services on offer.

Secondly because technology is pervasive, cheap and makes ideas that many of us could only dream of in the 1970s practical and real.  Relational services have to be highly local to work – you cannot build a relationship with someone you don’t know.  At the same time they need elements of central support – to share knowledge and reap economies of scale.  Technology platforms make this possible.

Thirdly because current approaches to welfare reform have failed.  It is now clear that market based reforms have rarely either saved money or improved outcomes.  Rather the social and cultural effect of much of the last 15 years has been to intensify an outmoded transactional relationship, whilst obscuring the deeper systemic challenges.  The neo liberal efficiency narrative has run its course.

All of this means it is time to change the questions we are asking – not how can we reform existing institutions but how can we provide services that support people to grow and flourish in this century.

Relational Welfare is not just a nice theory.  At Participle we have created new examples of how this Relational Welfare can actually work.

Circle, our social enterprise which supports older people with lower level care and practical tasks whilst building a rich social network and our work with families in crisis shows how those who live in the most difficult of circumstances want to foster their capabilities if given both a genuine chance and the relationships that support a developmental conversation (as opposed to a transactional message).

Backr is an early prototype of a service which fosters employability by building resilient social networks around those seeking work, at low cost.  Backr provides someone to vouch for you, to support you and reflect with you.  The community critically includes those in and out of work and strong connections to local business. Working with hundreds of people who were languishing in the current system and watching their lives transform within this different culture does feel akin to watching people leave a bad relationship.

The distinctive elements of these examples that characterise Relational Welfare are: a focus on root causes; being developmental in approach; fostering capabilities rather than (expensively) addressing need; counting social change not things.  The mantra is “don’t assess and refer me, enthuse and support me”.  Relational Welfare models are open to all (like the problems they address) in direct contrast to the old models, the more who use relational services the stronger they are.

The state needs to actively support, seed and provide working models of different ways of organising, valuing and providing – that is alternatives to the domestic sphere and to the market.

Relationships are the glue that keep us together, the dimension that keeps us human, not just atomised consumers or parts of the body politic.  Relational welfare offers a state defined in principle and practice by collaboration and relationships rather than the agenda of institutional reform and efficiency.

Hilary Cottam is a partner of Participle

This piece forms part of Jon Cruddas’s Guest Edit of LabourList

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Smith/516168738 Daniel Smith

    It’s true – I’m a writer and a smoker, a very lonely profession. The reason I have turned out like this, rather than a middle manager is that it is safer than other things to do. If you mix too much you compromise your security. There are a lot of bad apples out there and you just can’t trust anyone anymore.

  • CD13

    “80% of jobs available in Britain are never advertised but filled by word of mouth.”
    I assume you have evidence for that statement?

  • http://twitter.com/indraadnan Indra Adnan

    Hugely important shift in political thinking and action on offer here from Hilary Cottam and Participle – from top down, arms length theories of change to bottom up, close up actions for long term development. Feels real.

    In terms of welfare, success will depend on emotional literacy and capacity of front line to deliver – relationship itself must be informed of both the disaggregated emotional needs of individuals and the state of their inherent resources to meet those needs before wading in to help. People need security, attention, autonomy, intimacy, privacy, status, connectivity, community, meaning and purpose. We are born with all the resources to meet these needs, but sometimes lack coping skills, or a toxic environment prevents us from using them. Recommend look at Human Givens Institute for more on this.

    In terms of the broader society also, an (emotionally literate) relational approach is key to our being able to re-viviify communities during the long haul of recession and beyond. It speaks to crime, unemployment, education, parenting and above all general and mental health. Women have traditionally taken the lion’s share of this work on in the caring professions,voluntary work and at home. As 51% of the population they will recognise the value of this approach – it’s a vote winner – and will be looking for leadership roles. Political parties would be wise to try and reflect this re-balancing of skills in their cabinets.

  • Serbitar

    Complete and utter sh*te!

    It reminds me of the good old “relational” days where people in financial difficulty had to “go on the Parish” and were expected to sell their possessions – even a spare pair of shoes if they had them – to raise a few coppers to require the least amount of subsistence help given to them reluctantly by the locals. Absolute complete and utter twaddle! Even dafter, more unworkable, and potentially disastrous than Iain Duncan Smith’s welfare reforms. How can anybody with any knowledge of British history and half a brain consider this as anything other than preposterous?

    Words fail me.

Latest

  • News Self-harm in mental health hospitals risen by over 50%

    Self-harm in mental health hospitals risen by over 50%

    Luciana Berger, Shadow Minister for Public Health, has found that between 2010 and 2013 the number of people in mental health institutions who have attempted suicide or who have been found self-harming has risen by over 50%. At 29 of the NHS’s 52 mental health trusts, the number of suicide attempts and cases of self-harming rose from 14,815 in 2010 to 23,053 last year –  an increase of 56% . These figures, obtained by the Labour Party through a Freedom of […]

    Read more →
  • Featured We English need a debate like the Scots

    We English need a debate like the Scots

    I’m envious of my Scottish friends. From my limited connection to politics north of the border, the debate between politicians seems a clash between rival empty words. A coalition of dramatically different parties, there are good reason why the No campaign can’t tell a concrete story about what the United kingdom will stay together to do. But the Yes side rallies vagueness as much as hope. The SNP can’t answer basic questions about the institutions they’ll rule with. Alex Salmond […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Why Pakistanis should be angry as everyone else with what happened in Rotherham

    Why Pakistanis should be angry as everyone else with what happened in Rotherham

    The exposé of child sexual abuse in Rotherham over 16 years reads more like a horror story than an academic report. It was more than a dossier on how girls (and a few boys) were abused by gangs of men; it was also a damning indictment of multiple cover-ups at a senior institutional level. The details simply beggar belief. This isn’t the first time either. Nearly ten years ago there were similar reports of institutional failure in Keighley involving the abuse […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Farage might be UKIP’s candidate but only Labour has the answers in South Thanet

    Farage might be UKIP’s candidate but only Labour has the answers in South Thanet

    Now that Nigel Farage has announced he is throwing his hat in the ring, South Thanet is a two horse race: Labour and UKIP. The Tories have selected a former UKIP Leader meaning there is now no difference between the Tories and UKIP. With this, the Tories have abandoned the centre ground and gambled everything on trying to out-UKIP UKIP. It is clear now for people in Broadstairs, Cliftonville, Ramsgate and Sandwich that the only way to stop the two […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour must call for an in/out EU referendum

    Labour must call for an in/out EU referendum

    The article entitled, “Should Labour offer a referendum on the EU,” provides a comprehensive and detailed set of arguments against offering a referendum on the United Kingdom’s membership of the EU.  They are strategic arguments and initially one can fully understand the rationale behind them – allowing the Eurosceptic vote to split, gaining the support of business and picking up disaffected Liberal Democrat voters. However, there are some fundamental weaknesses in Younespour’s arguments. Dismissing UKIP is a crucial error. Whether […]

    Read more →