Oldham Case Study

8/8/2019 Oldham Case Study

1/3

Shared ownership in practice: case studies

Oldham Community Leisure: employee ownershipThe Office for Public Management (OPM) is an independent, 100 per cent employee-owned

development centre that works with public services to help to improve social outcomes. As a

result of our work in the area of shared ownership we have been appointed as one of a small

number of expert mentors to the Cabinet Offices mutual pathfinders.

After publishing a practical guide to statutory bodies considering transferring one or more of

their services to employee and/or community ownership, which was based on an extensive

review of the literature, OPM conducted in-depth case study research to explore in more

detail the specific questions, issues and decisions that have to be tackled in the move to

shared ownership.

An overview report will draw out the key cross-cutting themes from all of the case studies.This short report highlights some of the findings from one of these case studies, focusing on

how, in the case of Oldham Community Leisure, shared ownership works in practice, how

and why the transition to shared ownership took place, what the major challenges and key

success factors are, and what impact has been achieved over time.

How does shared ownership work in practice?

Oldham Community Leisure (OCL) is, formally speaking, a community benefit society

incorporated under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965. Since 2002 it has been

responsible for the management, operation and development of fifteen sports and leisure

facilities across Oldham.OCL is owned by shareholders, of which there are currently 65, with a 20 non-redeemable

preference share securing rights including the ability to approve the board at the AGM and

ratify the appointment of directors, who serve for a maximum of five years. A large number of

shareholders are members of staff, and there are three staff representatives on OCLs

thirteen-strong board of trustees, which also includes representatives from Oldham Council,

the voluntary, sports, health, community safety and business sectors, and two users of

OCLs facilities.

All members of staff, whether shareholders or not, get to nominate colleagues to take on the

staff representative positions when these become available. A ranked list of staff nominations

(ranked in order of number of nominations) is then voted on by shareholders, who eachreceive three votes. Once appointed staff representatives attend board meetings with full

rights, and can vote on all matters aside from those matters that fall under the remit of the

pay and remuneration sub-committee.

How and why did the transition to shared ownership take place?

The establishment of OCL arose from Oldham Councils announcement in early 2002 that it

intended to outsource its leisure facilities to private provision. Staff and union concern about

the potential impact of such a move led to an initially behind-the-scenes search for a

preferable option, one that would better protect staff conditions and preserve benefits for the

communities in Oldham. A small specialist consultancy was also brought in to provide adviceand support. The central role of trade unions in this transition is noteworthy: not only were

page 1


2/3


they key partners throughout (and remain so today) but the idea of moving to a cooperative

model was actually first suggested by one of the unions.

A working group of about 12 managers, union representatives and members of staff

considered the merit of a number of different options, including visiting other leisure trusts

across the country, and decided upon the Industrial and Provident Society model for twomain reasons (in the view of one member of staff involved in the discussions): the fact that

staff representation was an important element of that model, and the fact that any profits

arising from successful running of the leisure facilities would be able to be reinvested into the

local community.

The key factors in persuading staff that this was the right option to go for were the fact that

they could become real owners of the new organisation by buying a share; the commitment

from the new trust that staff terms and conditions would be protected; that stability would

remain in other ways for example in terms of management systems and trade union

recognition. OCL was established and was awarded the contract after a competitive process.

The initial contract for five years, which has been extended on a yearly rolling basis since

then included a requirement that OCL retain the services of a private sector leisure

management contractor in order to enhance the likelihood of OCLs success, although at the

time of the first contract renewal this requirement was dropped.

What have been the major challenges and key success factors?

As so often, it is difficult in the case of OCL to confidently disentangle the impact of

significant individuals in this case OCLs chief executive in particular from the wider

structural, management and other factors which have had an impact.

The current chief executive came on board shortly after the transition to the new model in

June 2003 and since then has been a key architect of the organisations approach

(although OCLs actual strategy is developed based on a collaborative process involving staff

and partners). As well as a strong emphasis on openness explored below from the

beginning a high premium was placed on building links with important partners in Oldham,

ranging from statutory bodies to key players such as the local football club and editor of the

local paper.

All interviewees spoke of the benefit that move away from Council ownership and control had

brought in terms of freedom from bureaucratic and other processes, which has enabled OCL

to be much more responsive and fleet-of-foot: decisions get made much more quickly, which

has given staff and unions for example a sense that its worth them getting involved in

projects and programmes to change ways of working and services.

This collaborative approach has also been enhanced by the emphasis on widespread staff

engagement: for example the chief executive meets once a month with staff reps from each

of the main facilities, and with unions on a monthly basis too. As a result, several staff

innovations have been picked up and implemented, for example an idea to outsource and

deliver training to other companies and organisations in Oldham, on everything from

customer care to food hygiene.

One of the more challenging aspects of OCLs journey has been the role of staff trustees.

Both the current and past staff reps we spoke to and other board members commented

that the role of staff representative had frequently been challenging both from the point of

view of managers and the staff themselves, who reported finding attending board meetings

daunting and struggling with knowing what they could and couldnt raise or report back to

OPM page 2


3/3


other staff. Induction training is provided, and we heard that confidence in the role improved

over time, and that the chairs commitment to inclusive board meetings was important.

Interviewees also said that, over time, the board had successfully clarified where its role

could add most value, focusing on overall strategic direction and governance, rather than on

getting involved in the operational management of OCL, which is left to a seniormanagement team. One of the ways that this transition was achieved was by having the

board visit several of OCLs facilities and meet the managers and staff who run them; thus

enabling the board to get a sense of the realities of day-to-day management and confidence

that this was being carried out effectively without their close intervention.

The most substantive set of challenges arise from the problems caused by the length and

lack of stability of OCLs contract, which has had an impact on staff morale and has caused

real difficulty in attracting private funding for larger developments. Another challenge for

OCL has been Oldham Councils decision to retain a sports and youth development function

which provides swimming lessons, sports coaching, holiday activities at substantially

subsidised costs, that OCL is unable to match.

What impact has been achieved over time?

OCL has achieved considerable impact in its eight year life to date. Upon transfer, almost 60

per cent of OCLs budget was subsidy from the Council; this has reduced significantly over

time so that the Council contribution is now only 30 pence in the pound. There were around

160 staff at the time of transition, which has increased to about 240 in 2010.

Substantial improvements have been made to existing facilities and new centres have been

opened, including Saddleworth Pool and Leisure Centre and Chadderton Health and

Wellbeing Centre, and OCL has also developed a wide-ranging outreach programme

including fitness classes for older people and projects designed to improve healthy eating.

The impact in terms of the members of staff who work at OCL is also clear. Sickness levels

have halved, from 6 per cent at the time of transition to 2.6 now, and the emphasis on staff

engagement and openness, as well as leading to the kinds of innovation noted in the

preceding section, would seem to have contributed to there being just one employment

tribunal in eight years.

Less tangibly but just as importantly, all of the managers and staff we spoke to described a

definite cultural shift as a result of the move to shared ownership, with staff reporting real

pride in working for OCL, and being strongly conscious of being owners of the business. One

of the people we spoke to said that whereas in a Council setting it can be difficult for

employees to see the bigger picture, employees at OCL find it easy to see where their role

fits into the wider organisation.

For further information:

To discuss this case study or to hear more about OPMs research into shared ownership

models, contact Phil Copestake, OPMs head of research, on 020 7239 0879 or

[email protected].

For other case studies and research outputs visit OPMs blog: opmblog.co.uk.

OPM page 3
mailto:[email protected]://opmblog.co.uk/mailto:[email protected]://opmblog.co.uk/

Documents

Oldham Case Study