TI-UK Strategic Framework 2014-2017

Transparency International UK Strategic Framework 2014-2017

Vision TI-UK will be seen as one of the UK’s most authoritative and respected NGOs. Over the next 3 years, TI-UK will increase its own impact in tackling corruption and empower others to do so. To meet the scale of the corruption challenge in the UK and overseas, TI-UK will become more ambitious and entrepreneurial, while retaining its core values of high-quality research and balanced advocacy.

1. Introduction TI-UK has an outstanding opportunity to build on its very solid track record of research and advocacy. The environment for tackling corruption is better than ever before, with widespread public, political, media and business support.

By being more ambitious and responsive, TI-UK will mobilise greater resources and step up its response to be more equal to the size of the challenge.

The charity’s constrained financial situation means that some changes will happen by evolution rather than revolution, but there is no doubt that in 3-5 years TI-UK can be a very different organisation to the TI-UK of today.

This strategic framework presents an updated vision for the charity with some initial ideas as to how the vision will be realised. This document should be read in conjunction with the 2013/14 Business Plan (attached in Annex I) which lays out the management rationale and operational philosophy that underpin this strategy, and covers certain subjects in greater depth.

1.1 Strategic priorities The organisation will have the following strategic priorities  Achieve greater impact through more effective advocacy and education  Undertake research that responds to the UK’s key corruption challenges  Create a stable funding base and build an adequate reserve, through a sustainable business model.

1.2 Strategic themes TI-UK’s work will be based on four thematic areas, whose provisional titles are:  Combatting corruption within the UK Objective: identify and reduce corruption and corruption risk within UK institutions & society.  Minimising the UK’s corruption footprint overseas Objective: reduce UK’s corruption footprint globally and use resources and advantages of the UK to maximum advantage in the global fight against corruption.  Curbing the UK’s corruption services industry Objective: ensure the UK does not act as a safe haven for international corruption  Combatting corruption around the world Objective: mobilise the resources and expertise of the UK to help the global fight against corruption, for example in the Defence & Security arena 1.3 Increasing our impact Impact can be measured and prioritised in a number of different ways. Ideally, everything we tackle will be an issue of exceptional importance, and the result of our tackling it would be significant change – such as the introduction of new anti-bribery legislation. For the purposes of this paper, it is assumed that we are trying to achieve some or all of four things:  Taking a leading role on an issue in which we can help to stimulate significant change – this might include relatively discrete or focussed issues such as the Revolving Door  Taking a leading role on a large issue in which we can help to create one or more smaller changes, but which are themselves significant given the size of the issue – for example, integrity in the police force  Adding TI’s voice and institutional weight to issues where they give added insight – for example, by bringing an international or corruption-related perspective to a domestic issue such as political lobbying

Adding TI’s voice and institutional weight to other organisations’ initiatives where the addition of TI will increase the impact or likelihood of success – for example, on creating registers of beneficial owners It is self-evident that developing better monitoring and evaluation mechanisms will be necessary if we are to demonstrate our impact. 

1.4 Overall message It is envisaged that a headline message will be developed in the course of the three-year strategy.

A working assumption is that, in line with the wider TI movement, this will be: ‘No impunity.

Discussion question 1:  What kind of organisation do we want TI-UK to be?- for example  A research-based think-tank?  A mass membership organisation noted for effective campaigning?  The turn-to organisation for anyone seeking corruption information?  A prominent voice in the popular press on a wide range of corruption-related issues?  Other?  What do we most want to keep about the current TI-UK?  What do we most want to change about the current TI-UK? Discussion question 2:  How will we know whether we have achieved success?

Discussion question 3:  TI-UK has become widely known for its campaign on the Bribery Act o Is there a single issue or theme that could take over as a headline campaign? o What are the themes in the wider TI movement that might be relevant to TIUK?

2. Research Objective: Produce high-quality research as a platform for effective advocacy.

With a new in-house research capacity, we are well-placed to increase our research quality and output, and to develop a distinct TI-UK ‘voice’.

A reputation for high-quality research is central to TI's reputation. TI-UK has typically commissioned external research as and when project funding permitted. Our current business model is based in large part on project funding, and this means that an immediate priority is to deliver the required outputs for those projects.

We will move from a reactive/funded approach to research, to one that is pro-active and designed in the first instance to address the areas of greatest need and impact.

2.1 Strategy The research strategy will be to:  continue to undertake sound research as a basis for advocacy  increase in-house research capacity  increase oversight of research quality  combine larger projects with shorter, more opportunistic research pieces, for example through using Freedom of Information requests  continue to produce practical tools based on our research.

The annual business plan will define key research areas based on the areas of greatest need and impact, following a prioritisation process that will be agreed with the Research Committee 2.2 New research areas Becoming more pro-active in our research requires us to identify the areas that we feel present both the greatest challenges and the opportunities for TI-UK to achieve the greatest impact. This does not mean that TI-UK would research only these areas – but that they would become a priority for allocation of resources and fundraising. The following have been suggested to date:  Police  Other industrial sectors following the DSP model in which TI-UK leads a global programme focussed on a single area or issue– which ones? o Pharmaceuticals and Healthcare o Oil & Gas o Financial sector o note that leading a global programme requires agreement from TI-S  UK Politics  Lobbying o Codes of conduct  Organised crime  The UK as a centre of corruption-related services o Asset recovery o Money laundering  The Public sector in general, to mirror our work in the private sector  Sport  Citizens as victims – using information from an ALAC to prioritise research and advocacy.

Discussion question 4:  What are the big corruption challenges on the 3-year horizon?  What might be the priority areas for TI-UK to research in response?

3. Advocacy, education and awareness raising Objectives: to achieve changes in policy and behaviour based on sound anti-corruption research; to raise awareness of the impacts of corruption and build a wider support base for TI’s mission.

We start from a good position, in that TI has a reputation for being reasonable and nonconfrontational and basing its views on sound research. Without losing this, we will where necessary be more visible and assertive in future.

3.1 Policy-making: turning research into effective advocacy Policy-making is the intermediate stage between research and advocacy. In the past, our policymaking has in part been to be reactive. However, in line with a pro-active research strategy, the strategy for our policy-making will be to set the agenda not solely react to events.

3.2 Strategic approach to advocacy To date, TI-UK’s advocacy has been undertaken on a slightly ad hoc basis. At its best it has been spectacularly successful – notably in the award-winning campaign for the Bribery Act. However, we need to take a more consistent and coordinated approach to make the best use of our contacts and resources and ensure we have better follow through on key advocacy positions.

In particular, we need to be better networked in Parliament and government, as many of our proposed policy changes will require support in those quarters.

A key part of getting across advocacy messages is meeting the right people and gaining a reputation for being an organisation that is active and influential. Greater networking and higher visibility of TI-UK senior staff will be an institutional priority in future.

We will continue to work in coalition with other organisations in order to gain the support of others in fulfilling our mission.

Of great importance in setting our advocacy strategy is some basic direction-setting on the issue of people engagement – both because involving the wider public might help form our strategy, and our advocacy might be more effective in certain areas if backed by people power.

3.3 Building a wider support base Background Greater involvement of people in TI’s work is a global priority for the movement, and will also be for TI-UK. Before designing a UK-specific programme, some fundamental questions need to be addressed, including:  What are we aiming to achieve through people engagement?  How widely are we hoping to engage – thousands or millions?  Do we have a target audience?  What resources can we allocate to this?  How does this rate as a priority compared to other areas of work?  What mechanism(s) would we use for people engagement?

Options for People Engagement There are several options for how this might happen in the UK, including:  Building our membership  Developing a separate and wider supporter base  Activities in universities and/or business schools  Activities in schools  A UK ALAC or reporting hotline  Greater use of social media and new technologies  Use of citizen auditors  Regional events  Participation in TI-S global campaigns  Advertising

  

Mass-mobilisation events such as marches or petitions Involvement of celebrities Others.

Need for strategic choices Whichever route or routes are chosen will have a substantial impact on the tone of the organisation and what resources are required. For example, a mass-mobilisation petition requires a different set of skill and investment to an ALAC. This is the area in which we need to make our most important strategic choices.

Executive Director’s view Unlike the other areas of this paper, the Executive Director is laying out a view in order to help frame the discussion. It is as follows: The 3-year people engagement strategy should seek to a) identify and capitalise on the existing base of goodwill and support that TI-UK has, b) build a wider general awareness of TI and the issues relevant to TI, c) put in place a mechanism that allows TI to respond to the corruption concerns of citizens across the UK. In practice this would mean:  Building the membership base to between 1,000 and 5,000 people, and therefore re-defining what a ‘member’ is  Re-categorising our existing 120 members who have voting rights so that there is a core group who feel a create sense of responsibility for TI and the delivery of its mission  Identifying an existing network, such as students/universities/young professionals, who will take the TI message more widely and regionally  Taking opportunities as they arise for wider engagement of the general public, but not proactively seeking them – for example, collaborating with the TI-S fundraising department on a CPI-linked fundraising campaign  Making a serious effort to examine the establishment of an ALAC and, if the board approves an initial plan, aiming to have one in place by the end of year three.

Discussion question 5  What does People Engagement mean to TI-UK?  Should TI-UK make a serious effort to develop an ALAC?  How wide do we think our membership base should or could become?  Do we need to move beyond our base in London, and if so what is a practical way of doing so?

4. Development of current programme areas 4.1 Defence & Security Programme It is assumed that the DSP programme will stay within TI-UK. A section will be included in the three-year strategy after consultation with the DSP team.

4.2 Business Integrity Programme This currently comprises  The Business Integrity Forum (formerly CSF)  The development of a corporate benchmark  Training  Other services  Potentially, some large and multi-faceted corporate partnerships In addition, we have produced a series of highly-regarded tools for businesses to use in their anticorruption programmes. These have been more or less in line with the Bribery Act, and may now need a new direction.

We have not taken a noticeably strategic approach to the corporate sector in the past. The strategy has been to build any of the activities listed above in ways that are in line with TI’s mission as and where funding is available. In future, we will aim to take a more strategic approach.

Discussion question 6  In taking a more strategic approach to the corporate sector:  Should we maintain or modify the current approach of avoiding working with companies that have recently transgressed/ or are perceived to have transgressed?  Should we develop tools that are not available in the public domain for the purpose of generating revenue, or should we generally publish the tools even if this means a reduced level of income?  What other key elements should be considered?

4.3 Public Sector Integrity Programme TI-UK’s approach to the corporate sector has had some notable successes. Arguably, the next three years will be characterised by scandals in the public sector as oversight resources are cut back and open data become a reality. This may give us scope to develop a programme of public sector work, drawing on the excellent work in this area by many other TI chapters. However, it may be more difficult to fund than the work in the private sector.

Discussion question 7  Is there value in trying to develop a UK Public Sector integrity programme?  What would it look like?  How would we be able to fund it?

4.4 Other sectoral programmes TI-S has opened the door to chapters running sectoral programmes – not simply industrial sectors, but on other themes such as aid and development. These programmes combine all three elements of a chapter’s activities – research, policy and advocacy. Due to the DSP programme, TI-UK has unique experience and expertise in this area – though any proposals from TI-UK would need TI-S approval.

Discussion question 8  To what extent do we see the DSP model of having international programmes run under the TI-UK banner as replicable within TI-UK?  Is it desirable to develop other programmes on this model?  In what areas might they be developed?  What are the criteria for deciding?

5. Fundraising Objective: provide sufficient resources for expansion of TI-UK’s activities and thereby provide greater mission impact.

Energetic, visible and high-impact charities are better at attracting funds. TI-UK should aim to be seen in this light, but above all needs a more assertive fundraising culture – in which fundraising is seen as a high priority, approached systematically and resourced effectively.

The overall strategy will be:  To create a fundraising culture  To generate sufficient funds, and unrestricted funds where possible, to enable the organisation to choose where to invest in research and programme activities.

Discussion question 9



What is the correct strategy to broaden and extend our funding base? o What is an optimal mix of funding sources for a charity like TI-UK? o What scale of funding do we view as necessary to achieve our ambitions?

6. What is missing?

Discussion question 10

o Are there any key issues or areas that are not covered in this paper and are important in the development of our three-year strategy?

Annex I Board Strategy Away Day 30th July DRAFT AGENDA 9.00 9.30

Arrival, tea and coffee Welcome - Robert Barrington Introductions and housekeeping

9.40

10.55

Taking stock  What are you specifically proud of about TI-UK?  What kind of organisation do we want to be?  What does success look like?

Introductory remarks – David Nussbaum Where next?  What type of single issue or focus area might carry TI-UK through the next three years?

Introduction to next session

11.00am

BREAK

11.15

Research and programmes - identifying priorities for TI-UK Break-out groups Report back Discuss and prioritise  where would funding come from?

10.20 10.25

12.15 12.30

1pm

LUNCH

2.00

People engagement – what does it look like?

Break-out groups  Why are we doing it?  How should we do it?  Who should we engage with?

Report back Discuss and prioritise  where would funding come from?

2.45 3.00

3.30pm

BREAK

3.45 4.10 4.30 4.40

Fundraising - where can we get funding from?

Reflecting on today  What are the key elements you would like to see in TI-UK’s strategy?

Summing up – David Nussbaum Next steps – Robert Barrington

4.45pm

CLOSE

Annex II Business Plan FY 2013/14 The business plan has previously been circulated to board members – further copies are available on request. It lays out much of the philosophy that underpins this Strategic Framework, and therefore the two documents should be considered together.

ANNEX III TI-UK IN NUMBERS

Current staff Total of which DSP

15 10

Income FY 12/13 Total of which DSP

£1,262,000 £ 779,000

Projected income FY 13/14 Total £1,364,000 of which DSP £ 754,000

Twitter followers TI-UK overall DSP (additionally)

1,281 811

Most downloaded document TI-UK website ‘UK Bribery Act – Adequate Procedures Guidance’ – 20,788 downloads DSP micro-site 'Building Integrity and Reducing Corruption in Defence and Security: 20 Practical Reforms' - 1724 downloads