Colin Falconer is Director of  an innovation consultancy.

Asset-based philosophy has an Aristotle-like emphasis on the ‘what’ we should develop in order to build a ‘good life’. I believe doing more than react to or prevent disadvantage is something that can help invigorate our social leadership.

‘Asset-based’ means embracing capability and shifting the focus from what is lacking to what is working – from Strengths-based Practice and Asset-Based Community Development, to Appreciative Inquiry, the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework and Advantaged Thinking. These approaches range from working with an individual’s strengths, to mobilising resources within a community, to maximising opportunities for systemic change. What unites them as ‘asset-based’ is a belief in relational solutions and a passion for looking beyond meeting problems towards nurturing possibilities.

I help organisations apply asset-based innovations, including providing advice for ’s Youth Fund. Since asset-based theory is not about one-size-fits-all, I have worked with Paul Hamlyn Foundation to introduce a glossary of ‘where’ different asset-based approaches are likely to thrive. These translate into ‘assetspots’ that highlight the of what and how organisations deliver, alongside the influence organisations apply to wider policies and perceptions. Exploring them, four leadership challenges emerge.

The first challenge is in growing ‘identity-positive’ organisations. In particular, this refers to what and how vision and values that invest in enabling good, and how they are communicated. It means more, however, than articulating an inspirational vision for social transformation. Leadership must also define and share the ethos by which transformation actually happens. Who you are, and what you say, increasingly matters.

The second challenge is being open to work ‘with-people’. This means empathetic leadership, sensitive to how far the people an organisation supports are involved across governance, decision making and service design, as well as in delivery. People-powered organisations must have leaders who trust people as citizens of change – not just clients or customers. Openness requires an equalising relationship.

The third challenge is in the operational and strategic ‘know-how’ to optimise the various processes and programmes that nurture assets. In other words, leaders who understand the significance of building purposeful culture and technology, from staff performance systems to project logic models. Organisations that continue to ‘cope’ with management and delivery styles that do not flourish skills and resources will struggle to sustain asset-based endeavours longer term.

The fourth challenge is in determining what impact means. It can never be enough to capture outputs and outcomes required by contracts, if they do not match the mission we believe in or the complex narrative of people’s lived experience. Equally, we cannot be satisfied to evidence what we do just to attract more funding, if we do not also learn from what happens in order to evolve our offer. Treasuring thoughtful measurement and practical insight defines our capacity for progress.

Exploring these challenges through the Clore Social Leaders’ Capabilities Framework, the ‘generous collaborator’ stands out to me as an underrated capability to recognise assets in each other and to harness them collectively. When it comes to good social change, we best lead assets together.

Please share you comments below, or join the conversation on Twitter.

Increasing awareness of civic duty is a core aim of the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation report, Rethinking Relationships: Phase One of the Inquiry into the Civic Role of Arts Organisations.

Society has become fragmented – a lot of the things that used to bring us together don’t exist anymore. We have reached a point in society where our relationship with our phones and technology often subsume our personal relationships, both with each other and within our communities.

But human beings are social creatures. We are hardwired to interact socially with one another, and looking at recent political and societal events, we can all see an upsurge of people coming together. This was clearly demonstrated by the outreach of community support following the London and Manchester terror attacks, and after the fire at Grenfell Tower where we bore witness to the touching efforts of people reaching out in solidarity. People are not waiting for those in positions of authority to take appropriate action, instead they are using their own initiative to carry out their personal civic role.

Gulbenkian is conducting an Inquiry into the civic role of arts organisations. Their new report was developed alongside a panel of leaders, mostly from arts organisations, who provided recommendations as to how social and arts organisations can work together to understand the civic role arts organisations play, and what more is possible.

I am a member of this panel - I joined to add a voice from the social sector, particularly given that the Inquiry is largely focused on arts organisations. There are clear synchronicities in the work of arts and social organisations, but I wanted to understand what more could be done to create a common voice and unify cross-purpose initiatives between and beyond our respective sectors.

I say this because I feel that arts organisations, particularly the publicly funded ones, can do more to support the people in society who need it most. Arts organisations have a vast foothold across the UK in the form of community centres, theatres, libraries, museums, galleries and more, and this gives us amazing opportunities to heal the broken parts of our social fabric. Clearly they can’t do it alone, and collaborations with social leaders are vital. Thank you Gulbenkian, for highlighting some great examples, but let's not believe that these partnerships are common.

The social sector exists to create a fairer society, promote equality and fight social injustice. Yet as evidenced by the aforementioned recent events which brought communities together, what we stand for is not the preserve of the social sector, or any other sector.

It is incumbent upon us all to create deeper connections with one another on personal, organisational, cross-sector and a community-wide level, and this includes debating the issues that really matter.

So today I am asking all Clore fellows and interested parties, from the arts and social sector, to join in the debate. Let us know what you think. How do we get more arts organisations to engage with local charities to maximise our reach, particularly within disadvantaged and poorly served communities? And how do we get more social leaders to offer support, and also challenge other sectors to work together?

Let’s find multiple ways to collaborate, harness solidarity and become more unified in our civic role.

Share you comments below or join the conversation on Twitter.

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.