How a Metaphor Inspired by Formula 1 Motor Racing Can Help Enhance the Work of a Social Inclusion Community Center

Abstract

Not-for-profit organizations provide a range of services that satisfy the needs of individuals and help a community to be sustainable. To explain how staff based at a social inclusion community center contribute to social impact, we undertake a case study and incorporate the stakeholder approach that draws on the activities of Pembroke House in south London. Pembroke House engages in social action and provides a number of services considered beneficial to the local community it serves. By adopting this approach, we place emphasis on how the value co-creation concept, which is reinforced by the social marketing approach, helps staff to provide different forms of intervention that ultimately give rise to trust-based relationships involving those providing the service and those receiving the service. To explain this, we make an analogy between a Formula 1 motor racing team servicing a car during a pit-stop while competing in a grand prix and a vulnerable person who visits a food bank seeking assistance in the form of a food parcel. Through the process of drawing on the use of metaphors and making a link with Formula 1 motor racing, we elucidate the value co-creation process and reveal how the social impact provision provided by Pembroke House can be intensified through the deployment of the stakeholder approach, which gives rise to a social inclusion community center partnership framework.

1. Introduction

Kennedy and Snell [1] have outlined the interventions in place to help deal with food insecurity, and we add to the body of social impact knowledge by indicating how those working for a community center that provides support to people in need can avail themselves of marketing theory to provide additional interventions. We also provide insights into why the recipient of an intervention may be inclined to become a volunteer and give back something to the community. For the purpose of this paper, we broaden the conceptual base of what a community center is and consider how efficacy [2] can be viewed in the context of service provision from a value co-creation perspective. We extend the meaning of a community center and denote it as a social inclusion community center as this is more representative and allows us to build on the work of Ojasalo and Kauppinen [3] regarding what public value is and how public service value co-creation occurs. We also consider the work of Osbourne and Strokosch [4] regarding the evaluation of public service delivery by acknowledging that community-based organizations are embedded in their community and are in constant need of resources [5]. Hence, we contribute to knowledge by explaining how value co-creation can increase the wellbeing of citizens through a person in need assuming the role of co-creator [6]. The question we set ourselves is as follows: How can the manager of a social inclusion community center provide a tailored service to members of the public who have a defined set of needs?

We are able to find an answer to the question by referring to the process by which a Formula 1 racing car driver enters the pit during a race and avails themselves of the services available, without which they would be unable to continue the race and gain the points associated with where they place in the race. A Formula 1 race requires the racing car driver and their teammate (who is also driving a single-seater car) to complete a number of laps and to undertake one/two pit stops during the race. The racing car drivers face severe competition as they are racing against a number of other teams that are also intent on winning the grand prix that they are competing in.

A social inclusion community center is a hub that makes service provision available to vulnerable people (e.g., those with a low income, health issues or family concerns). This adheres to the view of Obaze et al. [7] with respect to “communal customers”. Indeed, a social inclusion community center represents the main interactive point/zone where people involved in managing and organizing welfare provision are based and encounter people in need. Taking into account the nature of support provided, we advocate a person-centric approach to service provision and place it in the context of collective value [3]. This we consider relevant as it helps the manager of a social inclusion community center to provide welfare to a diverse audience [8] on a continual basis. By considering the work undertaken by staff at Pembroke House in south London, we apply the logic of a Formula 1 motor racing pit-stop to highlight how marketing theory, in the way of value co-creation, can be utilized to ensure that the recipient of a charitable service has their need(s) satisfied. In doing so, we explain how the overall mission of a social inclusion community center can provide social impact provision.

To establish how the social marketing concept can be utilized by staff employed by a social inclusion community center, we utilize the value co-creation concept [9,10]. This is because value co-creation occurs through interaction between a provider and a receiver [11,12]. Value co-creation can be viewed as relationship-oriented and is dependent upon the willingness of people to exchange a resource of value. Value co-creation can and is, therefore, associated with partnership development. Indeed, we concur with Røiseland [13] (p. 493) who states: “‘Partnership’ is a type of co-creation in which a social group, a company or a civic organization engages in a two-sided collaboration with the public sector in order to create public value. In these cases, citizens do not just co-create their own welfare services but also create value for other citizens through voluntary work carried out in co-operation with public professionals and leaders”.

To be effective through time, the intervention available must be sustainable. This means that the manager of a social inclusion community center needs to acknowledge that social inclusion is tailored to multiple actors [8] and the combined knowledge can deepen the interactive value-enhancing process as it results in resource integration and innovation [14]. Such an approach assumes that an effective leadership program is necessary for supporting value co-creation and is interpreted as staff being able to “implement and sustain strategic change initiatives” [15] (p. 990). This, we assert, is achievable through a stakeholder approach, because social provision is viewed as a collectivist process. Thus, those receiving help are encouraged to provide support to others in need through the process of volunteering.

By making an analogy between Formula 1 motor racing and social provision, a comparison is made between the actions of a Formula 1 motor racing pit-stop crew, which is the operand resource (facilitator/enabler) and the mechanic/worker that performs an activity during a pit-stop, whom we denote as an operant resource (initiator/actor). Each year, a limited number of Formula 1 racing teams compete in various grand prix held in different countries. The racing teams are composed of two single-seater driven cars, and the aim is for each driver to gain as many points as possible in the season by finishing high up in the race order. The sport is governed by the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) and each racing team has to abide by the rules set. Bearing in mind that racing car drivers normally complete over 50 laps in a 90 min race, it can be suggested that they will, during their pit-stop strategy, experience service interaction that is representative of a circular flow of service innovation [14]. This is important to note because it involves interconnected stakeholders that are intent on fulfilling the role of resource integrator [16]. Reflecting on what type of intervention a person in need may require and taking cognizance of the fact that a person visiting a food bank has other needs, it is possible for the manager of a social inclusion community center to think in terms of combining service provisions by bundling resources [14]. Cogitating on the interaction process involving a volunteer providing a service to a beneficiary, those who receive help develop self-confidence and a sense of self-worth, which drives them to achieve higher goals of attainment. We can see this also in Formula 1 motor racing when a driver enters the pits and has all four tires changed, the car receives an injection of fuel, and a new front end replaces a damaged front wing. Formula 1 motor racing drivers are also vulnerable and subject to risk because during the pit stop, they lose ground to their competitors and need, when exiting the pit stop (or box, as it is referred to), to reassert themselves by gaining ground on the racetrack.

2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review

We consider food security to be an integral part of social welfare provision. However, studying the food-share problem in isolation is unhelpful because it is likely that a person in need does in fact require several interventions. Thus, those providing charitable services need to think in terms of an intervention being part of a subset of other interventions. To make this clear, we make a comparison between a person (e.g., recipient) entering a social inclusion community center to receive support and a Formula 1 motor racing driver making a pit-stop during a race. We do this because we are of the view that the coordinated actions of the pit-stop team can be compared to the coordinated actions of staff based at a social inclusion community center.

The motivation for this paper is, therefore, to establish how the manager of a social inclusion community center can devise interventions that make a recipient feel safe knowing that other interventions are available to assist them. However, it can be noted that an individual in need, like a racing car driver, is highly dependent on those that control the service(s) they consume. By making the analogy we do, we contribute to the development of theory through linking the metaphor approach with social marketing and the concept of value co-creation.

The analogy we make is logical because necessity forces a racing car driver to call into the pits for fuel/to change tires. Likewise, a person in need of food is known to enter a fixed location, “place”, to receive a food parcel. Hence, we draw on the use of metaphors to provide both a conceptual appreciation and to link theory with practice. This provides a contextual foundation for the form of intervention we describe. The approach allows us to incorporate the value co-creation concept in a way that has not been performed previously. This we assert is a contribution to marketing theory development in relation to service provision.

By working through the lens of social marketing, it is possible to provide guidance as to how service provision is linked with stakeholder action that results in those in need receiving the support they require. Indeed, the collection of a food parcel from a central location (e.g., food bank) and a pit-stop made during a motor race both involve human interaction and can be viewed not only from the perspective of a physical exchange taking place but also from the perspective of an emotional exchange. The individual receiving the service exhibits positive energy that energizes the people providing the service. The “hub and spoke” approach [17] can be likened to the providers of the service (the Formula 1 pit-stop team and the staff based at the social inclusion community center) immersing themselves in a knowledge transfer process. This gives rise to an improved intelligence-oriented as opposed to an information-oriented service that raises the confidence level of the recipient so that they are prepared to share their ideas (feedback) for further improvement of the service. This is true in motor racing because the car is built around the driver and is perfected through feedback during and after testing prior to a race. The feedback received ensures that the car is honed more specifically to the capability of the driver. Taking cognizance of how a driver functions and performs during a race is key intelligence for the racing team because the car undergoes continual improvement throughout the season. Live radio contact during a race with the team manager confirms the strategy to be adopted as the race progresses.

Before we draw on Formula 1 motor racing and the logic of how the pit-stop approach is managed and applied to social inclusion provision, it is useful to note the context within which we are applying the analogy. According to the Trussell Trust, 2.5% of all UK households (e.g., 700,000 households) used a food bank over the period 2019–2020 [18]. This suggests that the size of the food insecurity problem warrants more attention in terms of assessing and monitoring how social impact programs function [19]. It is also important to recognize that marketing has a key role to play in helping social cause providers achieve their objectives. For example, marketing audits prove useful in terms of staff analyzing a not-for-profit organization’s position and formulating its positioning strategy. In addition, various forms of promotion exist that can be utilized to help fundraisers target actual and potential donors, some of whom are happy to give up their free time and become volunteers and thus support charitable work.

2.1. The Importance of Sponsorship

In order to ensure that the marketing activities carried out by staff employed by a social inclusion community center achieve the objectives set, various social support systems need to be in place [20]. Furthermore, the stakeholders that contribute to the social cause need to be fully involved in the co-creation process for long-term support. Support manifests in a number of ways [21] (p. 229), that lead to social change [22]. One way in which to promote a social cause and raise funds at the same time is through sponsorship.

The importance of sponsorship can be deduced from the following quotation drawn from Gardner and Shuman [23] (p. 11): “Sponsorships can be defined as investments in causes or events to support corporate objectives (e.g., enhance company image) or marketing objectives (e.g., increase brand awareness), and are usually not made through traditional media-buying channels. Such investments provide funds to a variety of organizations and activities, including sports (e.g., Olympics), music (e.g., Kool Jazz Festival), cultural (e.g., Smithsonian Institution), philanthropic (e.g., Statue of Liberty), public television (e.g., MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour) and community events (4 July fireworks). Because sponsorship can effectively reach specific target groups with well-defined messages, they are powerful tools for establishing meaningful communications links with distributors and potential consumers”. As can be seen from this quotation, effective sponsorship involves a clearly communicated message and empathy with a specific target audience. In the context of our research, we consider how an individual who has received assistance gains confidence and gets their life back on track. In return, the recipient is willing to share their experience and knowledge with others who need help. In addition, they are prepared to provide support, sometimes by undertaking voluntary work at a social inclusion community center.

To ensure that the marketing activities carried out by staff employed by the social inclusion community center achieve the objectives set, various social support systems [20] need to be in place. Also, the stakeholders need to contribute to the co-creation initiatives [21] and be committed to achieving social change [22]. Bearing this in mind, it is useful to pose the following question: What do not-for-profit organizational staff need to reflect on in terms of sponsorship provision? Meenaghan [24] and Jensen and Cobbs [25] suggest that sponsorship is linked with corporate objectives and can take various forms. Sponsorship involving Formula 1 motor racing involves large amounts of money, which is necessary to underwrite the cost of operations [25]. For example, a Formula 1 constructor needs to finish in a certain position in the Formula 1 world championship at the end of the season to maintain the level of sponsorship required. Formula 1 marketing is highly focused and involves the use of social media platforms. As well as business-to-consumer marketing (e.g., fan clubs), business-to-business marketing is also important, and relationship marketing cements the network of suppliers and specialist companies that provide expertise when necessary. Interestingly, research undertaken by Zhu et al. [26] has established that commercial sponsorship is associated with and enhances a consumer’s competence perception, whereas philanthropic sponsorship is associated with arousing a consumer’s warmth perception. Warmth and competence directly influence a consumer’s attitude towards a brand and is influential in terms of purchase intention. It is generally agreed, therefore, that sponsorship needs to “achieve a wide set of objectives, such as community relations, brand awareness, company image, and corporate responsibility” [23] (p. 16).

2.2. The Influence of Social Media

Understanding how members of the general public are motivated to make donations to a charity of their choice is important. Of equal importance is the need to understand how staff employed by a charity use social media to both attract donations and market the charity’s service provision more widely. Reflecting on the “social network effect” [27] (p. 851), requires managers of a social inclusion community center to develop a detailed knowledge of how formal ties are established. For example, according to Saxton and Wang [27] (p. 853), by establishing the link between a social media platform provider (e.g., Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter) and end users, it is possible to segment more clearly the customer base into family or friends or fans. The “fans’ network” concept is considered important from a crowdfunding perspective as it allows people with a deep interest in a specific topic/cause and who are geographically dispersed to donate to the cause with which they identify [27] (p. 853). Interaction through electronic word-of-mouth increases the amount of money donated as the not-for-profit organization’s reach is extended. Also of importance is how a not-for-profit organization uses its website to both promote its cause and at the same time attract donations. Saxton and Wang [27] (p. 863), point out that a website needs to be managed because it reflects a not-for-profit organization’s internal capabilities. From the internal capabilities emerge the various interventions that distinguish the not-for-profit organization’s services from those of other providers.

There is a link between resources and personal relationships. Personal relationships are known to give rise to network ties that are useful for attracting new members into a network and can be used by a charity to recruit staff [28] (pp. 1103–1104). Personal relationships are also deemed essential in terms of establishing trustworthiness that manifests in knowledge exchange and knowledge transfer, and the formation of trust-based relationships [28] (pp. 1108–1109). Hence, “social capital” is considered important for the development of social networks and also provides a basis for the recruitment of volunteers who identify with the social cause and make monetary contributions to it [29] (p. 28). Another point worth highlighting is that through the process of interaction, additional networks are formed resulting in an expansion of the donor base.

2.3. The Stakeholder Approach

Bearing in mind what sponsorship is to achieve and how it is to help achieve the goals of a not-for-profit organization, it is important to reflect on what the stakeholder approach involves. Laczniak and Murphy [30] (p. 287) consider stakeholder theory to be advantageous because “it can be used as an organizing framework to allocate the firm’s attention to its various constituencies”. In other words, vulnerable people and their families, community leaders and campaign organizers, the staff employed by the charity, the volunteers, the sponsors and those who make donations to the charity constitute the charity’s stakeholders and are known to have a collective focus. The collectivist approach has credibility because it is focused on people gaining from joint experience [31] (p. 22), and deriving a sense of achievement. For the stakeholder approach to yield benefit, however, individuals need to be motivated to participate in collective action [31] and view stakeholder theory as having value [32]. They also need to view their actions as influential as the basis for the development of interactive relationships is trust [33]. Trust can be viewed as binding people into a relationship and the relationship development process can be viewed as creating emotional bonds. To solidify relationships, a “hub and spoke” type of arrangement can be adopted that allows the manager of a social inclusion community center to control and co-ordinate the independent parts of the service provision offered. It is at this juncture that we provide insights into the work of a social inclusion community center by referring to the work undertaken by staff at Pembroke House in south London, which operates a “hub and spoke” form of social inclusion provision.

2.4. Pembroke House London

Pembroke College Settlement [34] is a registered charity with two clearly stated objects:

• “To advance education and provide facilities in the interests of social welfare and leisure time occupation through the connection with Pembroke College, Cambridge, with the object of improving the quality of life of those living and working in the area of the Charity.
• To advance Christianity in accordance with the principles of the Church of England, and in particular through the parish of St Christopher’s Walworth”.

Pembroke House, located in Walworth, south London, has been in existence since 1885 (https://www.pembrokehouse.org.uk/). It was founded by students at Pembroke College, Cambridge, as a settlement, whereby people who wanted to help local people overcome issues of inequality and depravation lived and worked in the area, thus identifying at first hand the needs of the community, and working with the community to solve the problems with which they were confronted. By adopting an ethnographic approach to studying problems, trust was developed with local people and close working relationships were formed with community leaders that enabled social welfare volunteers to bring about long-term change in Walworth. Indeed, staff employed by Pembroke House and those associated with its work remain committed to the neighborhood and “provide space for people to learn, eat and enjoy life together, and take collective action on local issues”.

To achieve the goals set and to provide value to the community, a clearly defined activities program is in place that witnesses 30 different social engagement projects being administered throughout the year. The concept of residency is adhered to, and six full-time members are based on-site and work in partnership with residents, organizations and institutions and engage in reflective learning. Spiritual leadership underpins the philosophical ethos, and services are held regularly at St Christopher’s Church, Walworth, which forms part of Pembroke House.

The need for Pembroke House’s involvement in the community is as necessary today as it was in the late Victorian period when concerns relating to social depravation saw people coming forward to provide help to the community to solve problems related to social inclusion. Indeed, the residents of Walworth are within the 20% most deprived in England, and it is known that a quarter of the children living in the area live in poverty. It is for these reasons that the full-time and voluntary staff based at Pembroke House manage a number of interventions.

The food-share program that is operated from Walworth Living Room, which is part of Pembroke House, has delivered 340 tons of food to people within the community. This has been achieved through 40,000 parcels, which have been assembled using voluntary labor. The food-share operation has been supported by additional inputs, one of which is the provision of a hot meal for parents and children returning from school, when the local school is open, which is made available on a Friday. This is to ensure that everyone has access to food that is deemed healthy and nutritious, and which provides a boost to their emotional and psychological wellbeing that helps them to maintain a positive attitude. Volunteers are available during this time to provide additional support if necessary.

The neighborhood leaders’ training program for community leaders administered by staff at Pembroke House can be considered highly worthwhile as it has practical value. The Director of Partnerships has established a number of opportunities that are aimed at expanding service provision and fulfilling the role of helping to bring resources together to solve community problems that cannot be solved by a single organization. Hence, Pembroke House employees and volunteers are apt at sharing knowledge and methods that help deal with local challenges. Furthermore, by engaging fully with stakeholders, staff are able to find ways to combine resources so that a greater collective impact is achieved.

The two buildings, Pembroke House and Walworth Living Room, constitute, in marketing terms, the “place” component of the marketing mix. An up-to-date website promotes the interventions in existence and information is available relating to the nature of the support services. The demand for the services provided is expected to continue and may in fact intensify due to a number of economic and social factors.

Reflecting on environmental factors and the role that marketing plays, it can be suggested that staff at Pembroke House utilize the social marketing concept to identify and integrate the efforts of multiple actors [8] into a coordinated marketing program. This is necessary because the resources collected by staff based at the social inclusion community center are diverse in nature and need to be tailored, through the actions of a volunteer, to the person in need. Interaction involving staff based at the social inclusion community center and the beneficiary of the intervention involves various forms of exchange ranging from the physical handover of a good to an emotional exchange that helps the relationship build through time. It is during the exchange process [11,12] and the post-exchange process that feedback is provided and value co-creation occurs. Ultimately, an extended/improved service materializes, and the marketing planning process is further refined.

3. The Metaphorical Approach

To make the analogy that we do, we use the metaphorical approach and draw on the wisdom of Morgan [35] (p. 611) who suggests that: “The use of a metaphor serves to generate an image for studying a subject”. We concur with Kendall and Kendall [36] (p. 149), who state: “Invoking a metaphor means opening the door for a listener to enter a subject in a different way”. We make clear how social impact provision can stimulate the manager of a social inclusion community center into thinking differently about food-share programs and relate the food bank concept to a wider view of social inclusion provision and community involvement. Social marketing can, therefore, be used to identify what can be accomplished as regards social impact service provision and can incorporate the value co-creation concept so that marketing programs are built around the needs of the individual (person-centric).

We now set about providing an answer to the question: How can the manager of a social inclusion community center provide a tailored service to members of the public who have a defined set of needs? To do this, we follow the logic specified by Jensen [37] (p. 40), who suggests: “Metaphors enable the connection of information about a familiar concept to another familiar concept, leading to a new understanding where the process of comparison between the two concepts acts as generators for new meaning”. With this in mind, we link a Formula 1 racing car driver making a pit-stop to an individual in need of food, entering a social inclusion community center for assistance. We do this by acknowledging that social cognition and perception enable an individual to relate real-world events [38] to abstract notions to gain new insights into a situation. This view is supported by Pera et al. [39] regarding the need to understand better what the motives of stakeholders are as regards resource integration practices that give rise to value co-creation.

Although Audebrand [40] questions the usefulness and logic of the metaphor approach, we feel that we are justified in using such an approach as Grönroos and Voima [6] indicate that the value co-creation concept is representative of a metaphor for service provision. We draw on a detailed analysis of Formula 1 motor racing through the eyes of a racing car driver [41]. Görl [41] considers that “Racing is War” and “Positions in a Race are Resources”. Both these phrases constitute structural metaphors. As regards “Positions in a Race are Resources”, Görl [41] suggests that this refers to the fact that “Time is Money”. We consider this relevant in the sense that by drawing on Formula 1 motor racing, it is possible to devise a structured framework. The framework allows the concept of the food share to be linked more firmly with other charitable and social activities through social marketing. Bearing this in mind, the task we set ourselves is not to focus on a Formula 1 racing car driver being a competitive force, but instead, we focus our attention on the support the driver receives having entered the pits for assistance. The “Resources” referred to can have several connotations. We adopt the view that “Resources” are derived from the sponsors and the makers of the components that go into the racing car, which are then transferred through the mechanics (racing team members) that constitute the pit-stop crew. Hence, the value co-creation concept is relevant. The person receiving the intervention (e.g., racing car driver or person in need of food) is assisted by knowledgeable people who provide them with a benefit and knowledge, either prior to or during the interaction process.

Although value co-creation is associated with buyer–seller interaction, we view it from the stance of the pit-stop crew taking the resources and utilizing them (e.g., putting fuel into the car and changing the tires to give the car a better grip during the race). The driver is the beneficiary of the interventionist provision and is committed to “winning the race”, which is equivalent to an individual in need entering a social inclusion community center to receive, for example, a food parcel. The metaphor we draw on in this instance is “To keep the wolf from the door”, which is associated with a person avoiding a lack of food. However, as the reader will note, the issue being addressed is much wider than food provision alone. It is for this reason that we look more holistically at social impact provision by providing insights into making people aware of how to adopt a marketing perspective to place social impact work in a wider context. We draw on the use of metaphors but do in fact utilize a metonymical reference. We clarify this by drawing on the view of Görl [41] (pp. 7–8): “a metonym describes something by drawing attention to something that is related to or even a part of it”. Hence, we refer to a person in need of food also requiring other services and a racing car driver needing fuel and a change of tires. Both can be associated with “travelling a rocky road”. A rocky road refers to all sorts of impediments and risks a person is likely to encounter on their journey, and which they need to overcome to succeed/achieve their goal(s).

The phrase: “The pen is mightier than the sword” is in fact a metonym because the interpretation is clear. For example, what is written in ink can be just as powerful and do just as much damage as a physical attack yielding a sword. We take cognizance of the fact that a racing car driver and a person in need are intent on satisfying an inner want and inspire others through their efforts. The racing car driver proves inspirational to those who want to take up motor racing and the recipient of a food parcel eventually becomes a volunteer and a role model to others. So, it is possible to look at this from the perspective of “winning”. Bearing in mind that a racing car driver wants to win the race they are entered for and a person in need wants to receive what they are entitled to, we can deduce that winning is related to satisfying an immediate goal. Because goal achievement has a psychological dimension, we can place winning in the context of “Making an effort to achieve the best result”. So, an individual’s best effort should see them rewarded either partially or fully: the racing car driver comes third and not first but accrues points, and the person in need receives one food item instead of two.

The use of a metonym helps place the material in context and is supportive of the structured framework we propose, which is representative of a not-for-profit organization building and maintaining a spirit of community togetherness and ensuring that people have a sense of belonging. By linking the Formula 1 motor racing pit-stop approach to a social inclusion community center activity(ies), we can incorporate the functioning of Pembroke House London (including Walworth Living Room) in a meaningful and strategic way. We achieve this by explaining how specialist knowledge of the volunteers and the specialist resources are made available to those in need.

4. Conceptual Development: Insights into Formula 1 Motor Racing

We can think of Formula 1 motor racing as involving speed, concentration, teamwork (both before the race and during the race when the car enters the pits) and risk-taking. The objective is to win the race. At the center of this is the driver of the car, who experiences excitement, emotion and various levels of disappointment, depending upon how the race turns out. In the case of somebody visiting a social inclusion community center, the same logic applies. Such an individual is keen to experience a speedy service; they need to know what they require and not become distracted into accepting something that is not useful to them; they need to cooperate with those that they come into contact with; and there is a risk in attending the facility knowing that they are not fully in control of the conditions prevailing, and which may have an impact on them. As regards excitement, knowing that they can solve their immediate need is motivational. With respect to emotion, the beneficiary of a food bank service will experience gratitude and will warm to the volunteers they meet and engage with. This is important as regards building and maintaining trust. Experiencing different or various levels of disappointment will depend upon whether their own inner aspirations have been satisfied because of gaining what they need or what they think they are entitled to receive. For example, an individual may experience disappointment if they make a trip to a food bank in poor weather and find that the facility is closed.

Taking cognizance of the types of organizational metaphor outlined by Kendall and Kendall [36] (pp. 154–155), we purport that the “family” metaphor is most appropriate because it focuses on “people coming together to share each other’s company” and is representative of a community and a team. It can also be suggested that family members are stakeholders and exhibit some form of compassion towards other members of the family and their friends. Because there are different family structures in existence, it can be suggested that a community is composed of a range of individuals who possess different outlooks and have different types of needs. The objectives of social impact provision are to maintain and enable people to learn from each other, to interpret and relate to their environment, and to gain knowledge of how they can benefit from a change in behavior or lifestyle. Should a change in behavior occur, it is likely that the ties between individuals (whether they are family members, other people in the community or those providing voluntary services or team members) will become stronger.

There is logic to the argument of family togetherness because Taormina and Gao [42] (p. 172) state that when taking physiological and safety–security needs into account, family emotional support can be understood “because human beings are raised by, and physically and emotionally supported by, their families. Also, the emotional support that families give to each other is a critical component of a happy family life, playing a major role in a person’s feelings of belongingness”. It is with this in mind that we undertake the following analysis.

5. Analysis

5.1. The Pit-Stop Analogy

During a pit-stop, which is timed in seconds, it is important that the pit-stop crew work in unison and carry out their work in a collectivist and coordinated manner so that the driver can re-enter the race and drive at maximum speed, knowing that they are safe to do so. Once the car exits the pit lane and is back on the circuit, the driver can rest assured that they have a good chance of regaining or improving upon the position they held prior to going into the pits.

A pit-stop can be viewed as a necessary component of a race and cannot be avoided for a whole host of reasons, some of which are beyond the driver’s immediate control. For example, a competing driver collides with their car and causes damage to the body of the car (e.g., front wing), which slows the car down and forces the driver to make a pit-stop. Alternatively, rain falls that warrants a change of tires and forces the team’s race engineer to communicate with the driver and call the driver into the pits so that the car can be made safe, and it can then return to the track. When the race car enters the pit (box) and comes to a standstill, the clock is ticking, and the pit-stop crew go into action and conform to a specifically defined routine. Not every pit-stop requires a fuel injection because the rules governing the sport determine how much fuel can be consumed during a race, and the car only needs so much fuel to complete the race anyway. Bearing this in mind, let us start the analogy by identifying the need to change all four tires on the racing car and replace them so that the driver benefits from a new set of tires that provides a better grip, so the car does not swerve or skid when back on the circuit.

Changing the tires of the car is performed in a controlled way, and when ready, the driver is allowed to leave the pits to continue the race. As regards tire change 1, this can be equated to a warm welcome provided to the recipient receiving support from staff at the social inclusion community center. For example, a warm welcome can be extended to a lonely person who needs advice or a certain type of emotional support.

Tire change 2 can be related to the recipient receiving something to eat and drink (e.g., lunch), which satisfies their immediate hunger. Tire change 3 can be linked to a recipient receiving the food they need from the food bank, which is managed by an appointed member of staff who is available to supply specific requests. As regards tire change 4, this can be related to digital support, help and assistance to fill in an online form(s) (e.g., for a doctor’s appointment). So, viewing a person entering a social inclusion community center in this way is useful in terms of understanding what their set of needs is (e.g., a single parent or an elderly person), and how the support required can be delivered.

Referring to a Formula 1 motor race, one pit-stop member, known as the jackman, stands in front of the car and ensures that the car has been serviced to the standard required before the driver is allowed to leave the pits and re-enter the race. Hence, the jackman, who is under the direction of the crew chief, can be equated to a volunteer at the social inclusion community center who ensures that when a potential recipient arrives and seeks help, they have everything they need or know where to obtain it from before they exit the building and return home. Such an approach adheres to what Leo [43] (p. 62) refers to as “pleasing or providing customers with individual attention”. Understanding the requirements of somebody in need is helpful in terms of a volunteer being able to predict what other services a person may require. Such an approach can be considered beneficial to both parties because by adopting a person-centric approach to service provision, the value co-creation process can be enhanced. This is achieved through the development of trust-based relationships that are based on cooperation and mutuality.

5.2. Value Co-Creation in Context

A social inclusion community center occupies a single fixed physical location from which service provision is provided. A Formula 1 race also occurs in a fixed physical location. What is interesting to note is that in grand prix racing, the circuits are very different in design, and this gives rise to a unique set of problems that need to be navigated by the racing car driver throughout the race (e.g., the narrowness of the straights and the sharp bends in the circuit that prevent overtaking). Hence, each race can be considered unique as it is characterized by a different set of conditions. This can be equated to a neighborhood or geographical location where the population is subject to different types of deprivation (e.g., inadequate transport that prevents mobility or inappropriate sized family accommodation or a lack of public space that is needed for peace and solitude). A social inclusion community center may, however, be open at specific times of the week, but may not be open for more than half a day each week. In addition, it may not be open every day of the week due to the restocking of the food bank and the non-availability of volunteer labor to run it.

We appreciate that it is not always possible to arrange matters correctly in terms of a racing car driver making a pit-stop. For example, the driver may not accept that they should enter the pits to change tires and, consequently, when rain does fall, the original tires lose traction, and the driver is forced to drive more slowly and consequently travel at a much-reduced speed. Also, a driver may not want to come into the pits if their teammate/main competitor is ahead of them and they fear they will lose their position in the race. Furthermore, when a racing car driver enters the pits and comes to a standstill, an aspect of the technology may malfunction (e.g., the fuel supply may be interrupted which causes a delay, the machine used to fix a new tire onto the wheel may not work as expected or the driver may inadvertently place the car in a gear that does not allow the car to start as expected and the engine stalls). An error by the driver can cause the car to stall either at the start of the race or when it comes into the pits, and this can be likened to a social inclusion community center missing a physical item of food (e.g., a loaf of bread) or a service (e.g., group therapy) that an individual needs. Indeed, the community fridge operated at Walworth Living Room contains fresh vegetables but another food bank in another part of the country may not encourage people to donate fresh fruit and vegetables because they are not able to distribute the produce before it deteriorates.

We assert that value co-creation is achieved in the context of a social cause by outlining that Walworth Living Room operates a community fridge from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on Thursday and Friday, and recipients can collect food items they need, and donors can leave surplus food for those who need it. The idea underpinning the community fridge is that food waste is avoided. The community fridge is supported by local businesses and market traders, and by people from the community. Hence, various stakeholders provide food items that are of use to community members. Furthermore, Walworth Living Room also hosts a cooking club, and surplus food is utilized or placed in the community fridge. This is representative of tire change 3. On reflection, it is possible to suggest that avoiding food waste requires involvement from various stakeholders but also needs to be placed in a wider context [44,45] that involves the production, distribution, storage, consumption and even regulation of markets.

Those attending Walworth Living Room can have brunch until 2 p.m. (representative of tire change 2) and avail themselves of different types of support. As regards digital support, this is provided on a Thursday for 2 h and helps those in need to set up an email address and gain assistance as regards completing forms online. In addition, hyperoptic, which is associated with aiding digital inclusion, provides free digital training to those who need it and is associated with and supported by Southwark Council. The support provided relates to various training programs (forms of intervention) associated with online shopping, emailing and video calling, job hunting and making job applications, paying bills and making medical appointments, for example. This is representative of tire change 4.

Providing social impact service provision via a social inclusion community center requires sustained commitment. Walworth Living Room also organizes a table tennis club that operates from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. on the last Thursday of each month and is representative of or interpreted as tire change 1 as it is representative of a particular need that takes an individual to the social inclusion community center. A café is in operation from Wednesday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. (tire change 2) and a crafts club operates on a Wednesday from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. (tire change 1, also because it is representative of a particular need that is to be fulfilled). Please see

Table 1. Activities Available at Walworth Living Room.

Art Exhibition.	Social Knitters Club: Thursday 12 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Crafts club: Wednesday 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.	Southwark wellbeing hub drop-in: Friday 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Café: Wednesday to Friday 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.	Rose voucher drop-in (low-income families with children under 5 to receive fresh fruit and vegetables): Friday 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.
Table tennis club: Last Thursday of the month.	IT support (phone, laptop, ipad) drop-in: Thursday 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
Hot meals and games: Friday 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.	Sing’in’Jam (interactive singing): second Friday of every month 12 p.m. to 1 p.m.
Community fridge: Thursday and Friday 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.	Clothing repairs drop-in monthly: Thursday 12 p.m. to 2 p.m.
Community brunch: Thursday 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.	Pre-loved clothing sale: Friday 26th May: 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.

for a full list of activities associated with Walworth Living Room. As well as the activities listed in Table 1, there are also a number of other activities held mostly at Pembroke House, which are of a more specialist nature. These are listed in

Table 2. Activities Available at Pembroke House.

Performing Arts and Social Skills Program for Children Aged 9 to 13: Tuesday 4.30 p.m. to 5.45 p.m.	Ballet for Adults—Beginners: Saturday 10 a.m. to 11.30 a.m.
Music for babies and toddlers: Wednesday 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.	Ballet for adults—advanced: Thursday 11 a.m. to 12.30 p.m.
Instrumental, ensemble and theory lessons for children aged 7 to 14: Wednesday 6.30 p.m. to 8.15 p.m.	IntoUniversity—outside organization providing assistance in terms of university entrance or another chosen aspiration: Monday to Thursday 4 p.m.

. It is during these activities that interaction occurs between the manager/volunteer and the individual recipient of the service, and feedback occurs.

6. Discussion

Stakeholder/Partnership Framework

By embracing the social marketing concept and linking it with intervention, a structured framework involving relational connectedness [7] is produced that outlines the stakeholder/partnership approach, whereby a comparison is made between a Formula 1 racing car driver making a pit-stop and an individual in need who visits a social inclusion community center for an item/service (e.g., to obtain food from the food bank or attend an activity). Please see

Table 3. Stakeholder/Partnership Framework.

Formula 1 Motor Racing Team	Social Inclusion Community Center
Focus: Sponsorship in the form of brand association.	Focus: Sponsorship embraces social engagement.
Process: Value co-creation.	Process: Value co-creation.
Immediate objective: To achieve best racing car driver status (world champion).	Immediate objective: Solve immediate need (e.g., hunger, help with completing online forms, advice) and increase the security, skill level and confidence of an individual.
Overall objective: Win the constructor’s (best car) trophy.	Overall objective: Realize opportunities through inclusion (adapt to a smart/technological environment).
Direct means: The car (technology) outperforms the competition.	Direct means: Activities available.
Indirect means: Support from partner organizations.	Indirect means: Feedback through personal rapport.
Outcome: Enhanced teamwork and design capability.	Outcome: Fulfillment of an individual’s needs and enhanced lifestyle.

. The reason why this approach is advocated is that sponsorship is fundamentally important to the success of both a Formula 1 motor racing team and the work undertaken by a social inclusion community center. Hence, we concur with Brennan and Binney [46], who are of the view that to fully understand what sustainability involves and how continuity is maintained, it is important to ensure that social and economic factors are integrated into the sustainability approach adopted. An example is the use of technology that is used to store and transmit data that are then analyzed and used in a promotional context via social media.

The reader will note from Table 3 that the key incentive that brings people to a social inclusion community center is that the social provision provider is able to solve more than one problem. Indeed, a recipient of intervention should be viewed as someone who considers help to be beneficial in terms of assisting them to transform their life. Indeed, by viewing intervention from the perspective of improving a person’s wellbeing, it is possible to achieve a balance between an individual’s inner emotion, their skill base and new knowledge that can help them to undertake specific tasks (e.g., complete a job application, register a company). In return, the provider of intervention gains much satisfaction from knowing that they have helped an individual(s) in need to change their life for the better.

The concept of wellbeing can be extended and applied in another context. For example, Medina-Hernandez et al. [47] (p. 4), offer a unique insight into the subject matter by suggesting that community wellbeing and community resilience are linked to “future community wellbeing”. This is a logical deduction and emphasizes the need to consider intervention from the perspective of a sustainable community. In addition, if a person in need is satisfied with the way they are treated and feels that they are part of the community, they may be confident enough to become a volunteer. If this is the case, it is possible to suggest that the value co-creation approach has been maximized to good effect.

Underpinning the social inclusion community center partnership framework is the commitment of the stakeholders. Stakeholders play an important role. They provide direct support (e.g., funding) and indirect support (e.g., advice and relational contacts). They also act as auditors and monitor and evaluate how support and knowledge are interpreted and result in sustainable interventions. The resources that stakeholders provide do have an opportunity cost associated with them, so it is important that the resources made available are perceived as having emotional value as well as intrinsic value. By remaining committed to the social cause, it is possible to extend the type of support provided and to guide the manager of the social inclusion community center in terms of using social media networks to widen the reach and target new donors/recruit additional volunteers. A proactive approach to partnership development should assist the value co-creation approach because staff are perceived as supportive of new ideas and are emotionally committed to the social inclusion community center achieving its objectives. Agrawal et al. [48] support this view. Agrawal et al. [48] (p. 46), consider social value to be central to co-creation involving stakeholders. Rather than focusing just on customers, emphasis is placed on a wide group of stakeholders. This can be considered valid because value co-creation involving different stakeholders is known to give rise to a number of innovative solutions. Indeed, innovative solutions are known to originate from interactions involving multiple stakeholders.

Reflecting on Table 3, it can be suggested that in terms of value co-creation, interaction proves highly influential. For example, in the case of the motor racing team, the inter-organizational exchanges and customer engagement [7] involving the specialist supplier companies and specialist design companies ensure that the knowledge exchanged is utilized for knowledge development. It can also be noted that an intervention (an action carried out by a pit-stop crew member during a pit-stop) involves compliance with a protocol (standard) [49], which is necessary for reasons of safety. Hence, the racing car is fit for its purpose and will perform on any race circuit. To be effective, the social inclusion community center customer engagement [7] strategy must match the aspirations of the sponsor with those of the volunteer. There must also be a further match in aspirations with the receiver of social impact provision. It is clear, therefore, that intervention activities need to reach the target group [50] and be of benefit to its members. To ensure this is the case, a risk assessment needs to be undertaken, and the appropriate resources allocated so that the tasks are achieved [50] by designated staff. This will ensure that the objectives underpinning an intervention are realized and that the beneficiary of the service is satisfied with it.

In the case of people living within a community, such as Walworth, it is possible to suggest that several issues need to be tackled. First, engagement is associated with increased connectivity. People are expected to have a smartphone and be able to receive and send messages at will. But this may not be the case. Second, the large body of volunteer workers will remain committed and seek to offer further assistance when needed. However, volunteers require to be updated through training (e.g., custom-designed intervention) as regulations change (e.g., health and safety and safeguarding) and they need to ensure that they are compliant in their actions. Interestingly, research undertaken by Matos and Fernandes [51] provides insights into why people volunteer and what motivates them to do so. Matos and Fernandes [51] (pp. 480–481), discovered that people volunteer because they relate to the organization’s values and consider that relationship-building must be viewed from both the volunteer’s perspective and the beneficiary’s perspective. This suggests that those who volunteer have a sense of loyalty to a particular cause and are committed to help those working for the not-for-profit organization to develop new services for the community. Third, the recipients of the intervention will avail themselves of the help available. The recipients of service remain realistic in terms of what they need to meet their immediate requirements. In addition, the recipients of social impact provision will be prepared to proactively discuss their requirements with the volunteers they encounter and will provide useful feedback to them. This is because they consider the giving process to have value. Fourth, by incorporating different ways of thinking about how a social inclusion community center can prioritize its service provision, the “business” model in place can be transformed and adopt new structures [52]. The new structures can be managed, and the decisions made can be implemented effectively in real time. This highlights the need to develop and install new procedures [49] for attaining policy objectives. Fifth, the resources generated and the conversion of the resources into knowledge provide much fulfillment [22] and enhance the level of trust between the provider of the service and the recipient. But more importantly, it allows the recipient to feel that they are part of the community and are putting something back into the community [53], which increases their self-worth.

It is also important to remember that when devising and implementing a structured framework, it is necessary to consider how the policies and strategies of the not-for-profit organization are evaluated over time. There are different types and forms of evaluation that can be applied to interventionist policies to establish if the processes and outcomes are aligned with the objectives set. To be effective, organizational intervention needs to be viewed from the perspective of how the actions of the employees/volunteers are assessed, and feedback derived from volunteers provides insight regarding how successful the intervention was.

Merrilees et al. [54] suggest that staff-led value co-creation embodies empowerment that facilitates service innovation and service delivery. The empowerment of staff is important because it leads to improved, innovative services for customers. Reflecting on this, we endorse the view that value co-creation and resource integration are enhanced through social marketing activities. In addition, it can be suggested that social marketing is about offering insights into how organizational staff interact in terms of organizational co-ordination; and how they achieve their objectives through embracing co-learning [55].

As regards insight from social inclusion community center managers, they need to be able to evaluate their actions and think through how the different types of intervention “govern the actors’ behaviours” [56] (p. 285). This is so that the actions carried out are undertaken in a measured way and aligned with the outcomes of the interventionist policy. This does, however, place the onus back on the volunteer and how they undertake their voluntary duties. Volunteering can be considered from a psychological perspective as opposed to a physical perspective [57]. This is due to the fact that for value co-creation to occur, there needs to be some form of attachment between the volunteer, those in need of the service, and the full-time staff employed by the not-for-profit organization. Establishing matters in common is essential and so too is how organizational staff provide the types of intervention that are in demand. One of the questions to be addressed is how the engagement level of volunteers is to be increased over time. This is especially true in the case of people who have a passion for the work carried out by a not-for-profit organization and want to undertake a career in the not-for-profit sector.

In the case of a social cause, it is imperative that organizational intervention is viewed in terms of the psychological health and wellbeing of those who carry out the intervention [56], as well as how well the intervention meets the needs of those using the service. Also, the benefactors that underwrite the service need to be convinced that their resources are utilized to maximum effect. Should this be the case, it is likely that the stakeholders will remain committed to the social cause and ensure that it remains sustainable.

7. Conclusions and Future Research

Although food banks and other forms of intervention offer immediate assistance to those in need, they are not the panacea to solve the problem of inequality. By thinking in a more abstract way, it should be possible to embrace new ideas that result in long-term change. Viewing a public policy-related problem from a social marketing perspective provides sufficient guidance in terms of how a social problem can be dealt with. Such action can be viewed as necessary because appropriate intervention can be achieved through recipients of a service becoming volunteers of the service. Should this be the case, a social inclusion community center should be well able to integrate the processes, policies, procedures and protocols [49] to good effect and ensure that feedback is acted upon that helps to improve the delivery of an intervention.

We are able to make six key recommendations for managers of a social inclusion community center:

• The social marketing concept can be viewed as incorporating value co-creation. Hence, intervention should be viewed as imbuing the concept of mutuality.
• Value co-creation should be viewed as increasing the wellbeing of those in need and those providing the intervention. Hence, a collectivist approach can be adopted to provide service provision.
• A person in need is likely to avail themselves of a number of services, so a person-centric approach should be adopted to help each person in need.
• The recipient of a service can be viewed as a co-creator of services and possesses knowledge that can assist with future service provision.
• A volunteer possesses experience and knowledge that can be used to co-create service provision.
• To maximize the benefit provided by stakeholders, stakeholders should be integrated into the activities of the social inclusion community center by means of a partnership framework arrangement.

Accepting that marketing is a social science discipline and it is not always possible to predict how end users will respond to situations/events, it is important for the manager of a social inclusion community center to undertake data collection and monitor both the needs of community members and the commitment of donors through time. This will ensure that the resources needed are identified and made available when required. It will also help the manager of a social inclusion community center to devise service provision that is adapted to meet changing requirements.

We are of the view that future research can be undertaken to establish how vulnerable people can provide insights into how the bundling of services can help make a community more sustainable. This means placing value co-creation at the heart of service provision and taking a multiple stakeholder perspective [58] to charity work. This will allow those involved in such work to better understand the way in which value is perceived by the different parties involved [59] and should lead to various forms of service innovation. Research can be undertaken into how volunteers can maximize and manage the interventions on offer so that they can manage their workloads more effectively and at the same time enhance their own wellbeing. In addition, it should be possible to undertake research into how the various stakeholders interact with each other and form lasting relationships, which are of a transformational nature. Such research would be beneficial in the sense that it would explain how social inclusion initiatives are formed and maintained.

Reflecting on the analogical reasoning approach covered in this paper, it would be useful to undertake a study of how staff based in a not-for-profit organization formulate and implement social inclusion policy. Gee et al. [60] (p. 270), suggest that research can be undertaken to understand people’s sense-making vis-à-vis how they form knowledge and utilize knowledge. This can be considered relevant for establishing how staff based at a social inclusion community center interact with people in need and convince them to become volunteers. This would also provide guidance into how the value co-creation process works (e.g., from the pre-volunteer stage to the volunteer stage and the post-volunteer stage). Such research would be beneficial as it would allow the manager of a social inclusion community center to establish how a volunteer progresses to become an influential stakeholder and help shape the policy/strategy of the center.