How Turn2us learned to name the gap between ambition and resources

Across the charity sector, organisations regularly identify strategic opportunities that require new capabilities—data infrastructure, specialist expertise, sustained capacity. But declaring something strategically important and resourcing it fully are two different commitments. This case study reflects on one director's experience of being part of this dynamic, and what it taught her about her own leadership.

The context

Between 2020 and 2024, Jo Kerr was Director of Impact and Innovation at Turn2us, an anti-poverty charity operating under the same funding pressures and competing priorities most of us face in the sector. The organisation identified an opportunity to use their benefits calculator and data assets to understand financial insecurity across the UK at scale—work that could reshape both internal decisions and influence policy.

To Jo, the opportunity felt too important not to pursue.

The approach

Working with colleagues, Jo championed this work while also making resourcing decisions alongside the wider leadership team. They developed pilots, built partnerships with organisations like Social Investment Business and New Philanthropy Capital, commissioned new systems work. There was a successful business case in 2020, and additional roles were added for monitoring, evaluation and learning in 2021 and 2024.

By any reasonable measure, they were doing the right things.

Where the challenge became visible

But here's where the resource-ambition gap became visible in Jo's own leadership. As part of a leadership team making resource decisions across multiple priorities, Jo and her colleagues felt pressure to keep team sizes contained while maintaining ambitious goals. They prioritised investment in some areas, but capacity for data work remained limited—one data analyst in a team expected to deliver transformational change.

They went back to root cause analysis and strategy multiple times, but without committing further resource, and as Jo reflected later: "It just didn't shift"

The outcome wasn't failure in a binary sense—good intentions and credible ideas couldn't fully gain traction because the team didn’t have the resources required. The mismatch led to team churn that was initially seen as a staffing issue, but later understood as a resource problem.

Reflecting on this pattern, Jo described in a research interview how organisations across the sector often approach such challenges: "We've taken people on that journey. And we've sent you off with flip flops."

What Jo learned about her own leadership

Jo left Turn2us with greater self-awareness—recognising when enthusiasm might outpace realistic resourcing, and having the confidence to advocate for difficult trade-offs—has been central to how she now approaches strategic decisions.

Now, as CEO of Verture, the climate resilience charity, she tries to be more explicit:

"If we want something, we need to invest in it. If we can't invest in it, we need to be honest that it's not going to happen."

"Boards and senior stakeholders won't always agree to the investment, but there is something powerful about stating a case and pulling back on ambitions if the resource isn't there. As leaders we have to make tough choices and we can't do that if we're not in possession of the facts."

Why this matters for strategic decision-making

Strategic ambition without strategic resourcing isn't motivating—it's destabilising.

When leaders describe a "burning platform" and a "huge opportunity," they create alignment and emotional commitment. But if the resources don't follow, something corrosive happens. Teams internalise failure that was never theirs. Burnout increases. Talented people leave. And years later, organisations say, 'We tried transformation and it didn't work.'

What actually happened: they said it was important, but resourcing decisions proved it wasn't.

The caution is clear: the moment leaders present a burning platform without committing resources to address it, they've shifted from strategic leadership into organisational frustration.

The wider pattern

This dynamic isn't unique to Turn2us—it reflects pressures visible across the charity sector. Organisations operating under funding constraints regularly face impossible trade-offs between multiple strategic priorities. The challenge is being honest about those trade-offs rather than creating ambition that can't be sustained.

Turn2us continues to develop its impact and data work under new leadership. Many organisation's journeys with these challenges are ongoing—including Jo's at Verture.

This case study was developed based on an interview by Carmen Barlow with Jo Kerr. Jo is now CEO of Verture - the climate resilience charity. Since early 2025, Turn2us's impact ambitions are being taken forward by Michael Clarke - Director of Impact, Digital and Data. They recently recruited a Head of Data. Claude.ai supported in the synthesis and writing of the case study.