Social value, social impact and what’s being asked of us as suppliers
Social Value. Social Impact. CSR. ESG. Living Wage. Good Work Standard. Ethical sourcing. Net zero. Carbon neutral. Carbon credits.
These terms come up a lot in our work (and I wrote more about my deep dive into carbon-related terms here). As an impact-driven micro business, I’ve been trying to better understand how we keep improving how we work, not just what we do.
One of my key learnings from being a participant in the recent Southwark Supplier Readiness Programme is this:
“Doing” good and “being” a good business isn’t always enough to clearly demonstrate Social Value within a public sector procurement process. There's growing emphasis on how additional value, beyond high quality contract deliverables and standard operating activities, is articulated and evidenced.
This is being driven, in part, by new legislation. Through the new Procurement Act 2023 (1), there’s a shift in what’s being asked of suppliers.
What I thought it meant
I used to think social impact was primarily about the work itself.
Meaning: the projects we deliver with clients and the outcomes created with and for communities. The difference that happens through the contract.
And while it matters deeply, it’s not the whole picture.
What it is
Under the new Procurement Act, “Social Value” is increasingly understood as additional value: positive outcomes a supplier delivers to the community, environment and/or economy that go beyond (and are distinct from) the core requirements and deliverables of the contract itself.
Being a fair, well-run organisation is now the baseline. You need to have (and demonstrate) good governance, fair pay, environmental responsibility, safe ways of working and more.
Social value, in procurement terms, sits on top of that.
In public procurement exercises, typically around 10-20% (and sometimes up to 30%) of a tender score is about what extra value is created for people, place and community because a contract exists.
Not instead of the work. In addition to it.
What it’s not
It’s not simply “doing good work well”. And it’s not the same as ESG, CSR or general giving back.
Pro bono work, mentoring, community activity can count but only when they’re specific, intentional and linked to the buyer’s stated goals.
And those goals differ: by public service organisation, by sector, by place. Each organisation will have their own local priorities, shaped by the emerging needs from their communities.
What I’m still thinking through
One word kept coming up throughout the programme: proportionality.
What’s reasonable for a Tier 1 supplier with £50m contracts cannot be the same as what’s reasonable for a micro business delivering smaller pieces of work.
Getting that balance right matters. Not just for suppliers, but for the whole procurement ecosystem if we genuinely want diverse, purpose-led organisations to stay in the room.
📍 An emerging question is:
What is meaningful additional value, given the scale, context and resources we have – value that communities need, want and would benefit from, and that meaningfully contributes to buyer goals and priorities?
If you’re exploring similar questions, I’d love to share notes and learn together.
Notes
The Procurement Act 2023 came into effect in February 2025, reshaping how public sector organisations assess value for money, including stronger and more explicit expectations around Social Value.
Thinking Out Loud is where I share short pieces of thinking from the middle of the work. Ideas, questions and lived experiences, shared while they’re still forming. (Tiny Experiments Pact: Day 13/100).