David Green is director of Green Pepper Consulting, a social enterprise working with the third sector.

In the corporate world, ethics and success are not always synonymous. If they were, then we wouldn’t have activists such as Naomi Klein, or organisations like Greenpeace. But it isn’t just big oil or multinational mining companies that should be concerned with ethics.

Indeed, I recall the furore in 2013 when Comic Relief were found, at the time, to be investing in the likes of tobacco and armaments.

The fact remains that with a constant pressure to deliver, it can be tempting to push ethics aside. The outcome, it seems, then becomes more important than the means.

But does this actually matter if the result is the same?

The only ethical response, surely, is “yes it does”. It matters because no organisation operates outside of society. Indeed, for the voluntary and community sector (VCS), creating a better society is very much central to the role. So accounting for how you do this is important; and the reasons why should be clear:

• Greater public trust and confidence
• Credibility with local communities and the sector
• Better governance
• Inspiring loyalty, motivation, and the engagement of staff and volunteers
• More attractive to funders, donors and social partners

Of course the vast majority of VCS organisations spend their money with care; and e. But a wise VCS leader will want to embed ethics into the organisation’s culture at every level, from trustees, staff and volunteers, to its relations with beneficiaries, funders and other stakeholders.

This means not only putting the organisation’s values and mission centre stage, but also incorporating ethics into the leader’s own role.

A good place to start is with effective communications, consulting with staff and volunteers, engaging in external networks, and taking time to explain the organisation’s message, both internally and externally.

It also means adopting good and effective systems. Ethics should be embedded into recruitment, relationships, and practices. Creating an inclusive climate for staff, volunteers and beneficiaries to thrive, to speak up, and to develop will not only build trust and reinforce the organisation’s values, but help ensure sustainability in the longer term.

The leader’s personal behaviour must also reflect the organisation’s ethical values. Shouting and bullying, setting unrealistic targets, keeping people in the dark – none of these are compatible with ethical leadership. Instead empathy, honesty and respect should prevail.

Underpinning all of this should be basic principles of trust, honesty and integrity. As such, a commitment to model individual behaviour on the Nolan principles on standards in public life seems appropriate.

Clearly none of this is new, or particularly difficult to achieve. But it can be forgotten. So leaders should remind themselves, particularly when tough times need bold decisions, that how they get results is just as important to everyone involved, as the results themselves.

Please share your comments about this blog below, or you can join the conversation with David on Twitter.

Social investment is a subject that has been much talked about in recent years. There are some within the voluntary and community sectors with strong views about social investment, either for or against. As someone who has spent almost a decade working in the realm of social investment, I am most definitely an advocate. But recently I have found myself becoming quite frustrated with the social investment sector because I am not sure we are adequately serving those who have social impact at the heart of their mission – charities and social enterprises.

It is no secret that the social sector is operating in challenging times. We are in our 6th year of government austerity and public contracts are feeling the force of that. Given this climate, is the social investment sector providing finance that these often small organisations can access and afford?

Recent research has highlighted the need for social investors to be able to offer not just finance which is lower cost, but also blended finance and finance which can take higher risks. Unfortunately despite this need, often this isn’t the sort of finance that is being offered (although there are a handful of honourable exceptions). What all of this points to is that what the social investment market is currently offering isn’t necessarily what the majority of the market we serve wants from us. We are not responding to demand, but instead we are asking others to fit our needs and those of our investors. And I’m not sure that’s the right way round to be doing things.

When I was interviewed to become a Clore Social Fellow in September 2014 I was asked what change I wanted to help bring about in society. My answer was that I wanted to help redistribute resources; that there is enough money in the world but that at the moment too much of it was accessed by too few, and that I wanted to change that. I still want to change that. And I want to change that because the charities and social enterprises we are here to serve are struggling. We need to:

• Look at new, different and innovative ways to get the money that already exists to a point where it can be used to help the organisations supporting the communities in need.
• Be able to demonstrate that the finance we are providing is creating a social impact and making a real difference to people’s lives.
• Ask investors to support us in offering the type of finance that charities and social enterprises want; simple, straightforward finance that they can afford.

Doing this will be no easy task, but it is something I believe we are duty bound to do. Because if we try we might just do it - and this will benefit everyone.

Please share your views and comments about Deborah’s blog and full piece below, or you can contact her on Twitter.