It’s time to get real with you Social Edge readers, my fellow travelers.

My favorite (favourite?!) band is Keane (British lads, appropriate given my current location).  A line from one of their songs often echoes in my mind: “You’ve wandered too far / from the person you are.”

Thanks to the Skoll World Forum, I’ve returned to the person I am. It educated me, to be sure. But more importantly, it both grounded and moved me, and reconnected me with my core.

My head is bursting with social enterprise ideas. My gut is telling me to get started. My feet are walking on air. My heart is singing and I’m inspired in my bones.

Why? Well, it was partly the content of the breakout sessions, partly the organic conversations (with social entrepreneurship luminaries, moral compasses and modern-day heroes like Bill Drayton, Jeff Skoll, Eric Schwarz, J.B. Schramm, and Paul Farmer—to name just a few), and partly the plenary speakers (how could you NOT be inspired by Al Gore and Jimmy Carter?!).

Even at a school as socially-minded as Haas (see our recent #1 ranking in CSR), it’s easy to get disconnected from the social enterprise community. There are lots of distractions, carrots and open doors—clubs and case competitions, academics (), interviewing for companies you couldn't care less about, and generally questioning who you are and what you’re meant to do.

Sometimes it’s hard to feel like you’re moving in the direction of your dreams—that you’re exercising your passions day in and day out and staying plugged into a world that really excites you—when you’re immersed in learning finance and accounting skills, and generally way busier than you want to be with things that, frankly, feel a bit peripheral. It’s not an indictment of Haas, it’s just a fact of life in business school.

Maybe it’s strange to type this from a country in which I’m a foreigner and have never visited, but the World Forum brought me home. I felt like a local amidst this sea of humanity, passion, empathy, power, possibility, hope, and realistic idealism.

Indeed, the Skoll World Forum delegates and their counterparts are my lighthouses of compassion and morality, and my aspirational models for true leadership and social impact. These people are dreamers AND doers. They will undoubtedly be seminal touch points for me as I go back to my frenetic b-school life.

 
What an incredible way to spend my spring break. There’s no way I would have traded the pounding rain and wind chill of Oxford for the sun and sand of my tanned classmates laying on tropical beaches sipping pina coladas.

Indeed, they'll be jealous of ME, for my soul is sunny.

The BBL is all smiles with the President of the Skoll Foundation, Sally Osberg, and Jeff Skoll himself. After seeing them on stage, we seized the opportunity for a real exchange and to get THE pic for the scrapbook. After hosting and enjoying the company of the awardees and delegates all week, they must be as exhausted as we are!



Mike has a serendipitous and yet substantive encounter with Bill Drayton, founder of Ashoka and godfather of the social entrepreneurship movement. Drayton chatted it up with Mike and Omar for the better part of an hour. A true storyteller, visionary, and historian, Drayton bestowed upon us remarkable clarity on our own life missions. We had to hug him at the end of it.




Omar and John Wood, founder of Room to Read, talk about social entrepreneurship in education en route to the Skoll Awards Ceremony. Another completely unplanned run-in. Check out the picturesque and historical Oxford downtown behind us.

Group shot again. This time with Priya Haji, founder of World of Good. We’ve seen her rock a classroom lecture at Berkeley, but observing her interacting with her peers at this conference made it clear that this woman is truly a dynamo in the field. Only three years out of Haas, her path and passion is a shining example for today’s MBAs wanting to make a splash in social enterprise.

Every now and then, even social entrepreneurs need a voice of conscience and moral clarity. At the closing plenary, that voice was Paul Farmer’s.

With a rare combination of fervent righteousness and playful exuberance, Farmer forced us to reflect on the perils and limitations of the business thinking that has come to dominate the social entrepreneurship discourse: The quote below is long but I think it bears quoting in full. Farmer said:

“Our social entrepreneurs and all its supporters are obsessed with something called scale. The fetishization of scaling up our work is a source of both anxiety and hope. Bringing a new innovative project to scale often feels like the only way to leave a footprint of a good kind in an afflicted world in need of good ideas. .. . . .What’s been shocking to me over the past 25 years is the lightning speed at which policy makers, themselves shielded from the risks [that the poor face], decide that a complex intervention is too difficult or not cost-effective in Haiti or Africa, or not sustainable. In microfinance parlance, many of my patients are “poor credit risks.” But aren’t they the very people we claim to serve in the first place?

This is why I termed my speech a “Loyalist’s critique” of our movement.

We need to be aware that each of the terms and concepts and tools we’ve developed can be used to deny the destitute access to goods and services that sometimes should be rights, not commodities. Does anyone really believe that a mother loves her newborn more if she had to pay some sort of users fee for prenatal or obstetrics care? Such claims are “piffle” as you say in your country. But they are also reflective of an ideology that has crept into our entrepreneur movement. This way of seeing the world has deep, deep roots. It’s been remarked upon already but it’s our culture that is hard to see. It’s our culture that needs to change. Look around you and you’ll see people of every hue but there are not poor people here. It’s not that they need an invitation to Oxford. It’s that they need us to include them in our movement and allow them to be social entrepreneurs.”

I felt Farmer’s critique simultaneously in my gut, heart, and mind. To me, he was reminding us not to swallow the ideology and framework of business wholesale. He was asking us to remember that the same ideological sword we have wielded to attack the world’s problems—the one that treats people as customers and access to decent health care, food, and housing as commodities—is also the sword that got us into so many of these problems in the first place!

Instead, Farmer offered us a different ideology: One based on the belief that every individual has the right to a dignified life. Farmer acknowledged the importance of scaling, but I think he was asking us not to forget that all acts of compassion (even the smallest), and all efforts to alleviate suffering (even those difficult to scale) are worthwhile and valuable, even sacred.

The bottom line? Business is a tool for change, not a comprehensive way of looking at the world or treating other human beings.

When you go to a conference on social enterprise or nonprofit management, it’s a pretty good bet that you’ll come across a workshop on measuring social impact.

These are always well-attended sessions, where enthusiasm—and lingering questions—abound.

The Skoll World Forum was no different.

I went to a session here on Thursday all about this idea of measurement. It’s a huge issue in the sector, largely being driven by the funding community and the increased ‘professionalization’ of social change organizations.

The session raised some interesting questions. We didn’t exactly arrive at all the answers in a mere two hours, but I know I’m not the only one in that room who will be marinating on these tensions and challenges after I leave Oxford.

To be sure, practitioners wrestle with these issues day in and day out (I remember these conversations well from my days at College Summit).

What are some of these questions? Thanks for asking…Here’s a sampling of the most salient for me:

• How do you actually MEASURE the social impact you create? It’s been said that if you don’t measure it, then it doesn’t matter. But can you really measure the most valuable things in life? Does that which social entrepreneurs work to catalyze and propagate in the world inherently defy measurement?

    For example, how do you measure an increase in someone’s level of opportunity? How about their dignity?

    HOW DO YOU MEASURE LOVE?

• If you don’t measure, you don’t learn from experience—you lose the ability to have data inform course-corrections. But does spending time on measurement (and building measurement systems)  necessarily mean less time for actual PROGRAM? That’s what social entrepreneurs really care about, right?

    They want to make the greatest impact possible, but is it as useful for them to actually measure it? Time is as scarce     a resource as any…

• Big, established organizations gain credibility and stature from measurement and communication of results, to be sure. But don’t entrepreneurs (and social entrepreneurs in particular) exist as an alternative to, a reaction to, those very institutions? Is there a loss of credibility that comes with failing to adequately measure impact—or measuring the wrong things?

• What does ‘impact’ even mean? How do you even begin to define metrics that can cut across a plethora of disparate issues social sector organizations are addressing? Do you need counter-factuals and benchmarks within the same issue areas to do so?

• How do you measure OUTCOMES rather than inputs? This is especially dicey when your intervention is far-removed from the ultimate desired change (i.e., early education programs with the goal of increasing the college participation rate).

• How do measure impact for the wide variety of constituents that many social entrepreneurs are accountable to?

• Should the organizations doing the hard work on the ground—and the social entrepreneurs that lead them—develop metrics, or are they too close to everything to frame up what the right ones even are?

• Where should the money for measurement come from? Should funders earmark resources explicitly for such endeavors?

Whew.

My takeaways from the session were that efforts to measure must actually add value for the business, and produce useful data that it can actually use to inform strategic decisions, and that measurement can only flow from a clearly-defined strategy (that is predicated on a clear framing of a problem in the first place).

I’m excitedly going to be a strategy consultant for FSG Social Impact Advisors this summer, and these things are weighing increasingly heavy on my mind.

Check back in with me in a few months and I may have a lot more to say about this topic, but for now, it’s good to get the juices flowing again…

I walked into my afternoon session open-minded and ready to workshop with IDEO. 

Waiting for the session to start, I engaged in a habit I picked up from my days in strategy consulting -- calculating the cost of the meeting.  My back-of-the-envelope calculations for a teaching session led by Tim Brown, the President and CEO and Jane Fulton Suri, the Co-Chief Creative Officer suggested that I was getting ready to experience a session that most for-profit organizations could not afford.

The format was simple. First, a crash course on some key principles of human-centered design. Second, a group exercise to help us illustrate the key points.

In just a few slides Jane concisely articulated some of the methodology I’ve been learning in my qualitative methods class.  But as I’ve learned with my field homework assignments, it’s so much easier said than done.  Especially done right. 

I was motivated to take that course after spending 3 months interviewing over 120 Kiva loan recipients in the outskirts of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.  At the time I did my best to listen to the translated answers of the women and men I was interviewing and tried to incorporate observations about their place of business or home in my social impact review. 

I was fumbling around, knowing that my intentions were pure but inadequate.  I left Dar determined to learn the right way to do this type of assessment work when I started grad school, even if I was getting a MBA.  Believing that if I practice these skills they will be as invaluable for my future career as learning accounting, finance or marketing.

But let's get back to to Jane's great presentation.  She laid it out clearly; observation includes not just listening to what someone says, but also noticing what they do, and trying to infer understanding about how they think and what they feel.  Observation informs empathy. I’m picking up what you’re putting down, Jane.

As I go to Uganda this summer these skills will be crucial as we evaluate a program training motorcycle taxi drivers to provide first responder care to rural villagers.  It’s not about quantity, it’s about the quality and depth of those observations, the IDEO experts said.  But with only 3 weeks in the field, I know I’ll have to leave without having time to answer all my questions.  Don't we all wish we had more time to really understand and empathize with our customers?

After we went through the interactive skill-building workshop I wanted to figure out a way to share this exercise and the key learnings of the IDEO team with all the Richard C. Blum Fellows from UC Berkeley and students participating in similar programs leaving to do field work around the world this summer.  I know the my fellow students can not afford IDEO’s billing rate but neither can most social entrepreneurs. 

Maybe there's a reduced rate for do-gooders?  Or maybe it's time to flex my library card and reread the IDEO innovation books with a keen eye on empathy.

I'm sitting in on a "consultancy clinic," a cool innovation this year at the SWF where fledgling social entreprenuers pitch their ventures and get feedback from a diverse panel of experts.

The ideas: attracting capital to social ventures in Latin America, films that promote reconciliation in other conflict societies, and developing young artists and writers in the Philippines.

The experts: the CEO of IDEO, an experienced social investment financier, Bunker Roy, the founder of Barefoot College, and the CEO of the Institute for State Effectiveness.

The major theme: Everyone's talking about money--how to earn it, how to raise it, and how to make raising it more efficient.

The larger observation here is that it's hard to avoid impassioned dialogue about money and finance at the SWF.  This may be social entrepreneurship, but the inescapable reality is that it takes a lot of cold hard cash to sustain and scale these ideas.

I've heard some people from non-business backgrounds actually express frustration that the field has become too business-focused. I tend to agree but wonder if it reflects the youth of a field that is still trying to establish its credibility, rather than a willful ignorance of these other perspectives. After all, social entrepreneurship has always been multi-disciplinary, multi-cultural, and multi-sector. Yet, I'd like to see more voices from anthropology, sociology, spirituality, and policy represented here. I suspect that in the next few years, as the thorny question of money gets smoothed out, the conversation will expand.

But I'm curious if others agree.  Is the field adequately multi-disciplinary?  If the answer is no, then what is at stake?

Just wanted to quickly tack on to Mike’s post about the AMAZING empathy session.

Empathy, it seems to me, is (or at least should be) at the very root of social change efforts—and it’s at the heart of my interest in advancing those efforts.

Successful social entrepreneurs, I think, viscerally understand that making inroads on our most intractable issues is all about putting yourself in the shoes of your constituents, being sensitive to local communities and cultures, and engaging in a real and honest dialogue with those communities (90% of which entails really listening).

Social entrepreneurs are visionaries that are the world’s savviest businesspeople—but they’re also, well, SOCIAL! They get and use metrics and data…but first and foremost, they are empathetic and ‘get’ people.

Social progress, then, is about both the cerebral AND the limbic.

These people are smart and caring. Head plus heart—THAT’S the killer combo, baby.

The session and the panel were deeply inspiring, both in their message and in their being, not to mention instructive and impressive. Bill Drayton and Mary Gordon in particular exuded wisdom (both have an amazing ability to perceive meta-issues), humanity, humility, compassion, and, of course, empathy. Drayton cited Gandhi and MLK, and concluded with a provocative statement—that a lack of empathy is the root cause of marginalization.

This got me thinking about the value of conversion experiences in social change, in bridging cultures, classes and communities. For a long time I’ve thought that these types of experiences—in which those different cultures and value systems collide—is where the REAL work of social progress happens. It’s the secret sauce.

It also got me thinking about a class being offered for the first time at Haas this semester, Creativity and Personal Mastery, with Professor Srikumar Rao. I think of it as ‘Buddhism for MBAs’—a class that I’m lucky enough to be in. It’s all about cultivating greater empathy and awareness in yourself through practices that get to living in an ‘other-centered’ universe.

The audience during the empathy session was super into it. Q&A lasted over an hour and could have gone on for ten more without a loss of energy. The deep-seated interest in this topic, I think, bodes well for the future of the sector.

The SWF has corroborated a maxim I’ve always believed to be especially true in the social enterprise community: It’s a small world after all.

This week I’ve been excited to run into former colleagues and friends, enthused to meet new fellow travelers, and surprised by how many faces I actually already knew (even if I’d lost track of exactly how I knew them…).

While the promise of social entrepreneurship is picking up steam and there’s undoubtedly a proliferation of—and interest in—its practitioners, it’s still characterized by an incredibly tight-knit network. The great part about it is that, though it’s hitting the mainstream, it’s very much penetrable (my experience has been that youthful idealism and playing the “mentor me” / MBA card goes a long way)...

My mom used to sing me a lullaby: ‘Make new friends, but keep the old. One is silver, and the other is gold.’  

To be sure, there’s a palpable thrill that comes from meeting new people with shared passions, values and goals, but it’s been a real joy to see the old ‘friends’ too—former bosses, funders, partners, fellow evangelists for the field—from my time in system-changing nonprofits Teach for America and College Summit up through business school…although it’s kinda crazy that it’s taken crossing the pond to finally catch up with far too many of them!

I had awesome chats with two mentors who have been particularly formative in my own professional and personal development, J.B. Schramm, Founder and CEO of College Summit (picture below with yours truly and Mike), and Chuck Harris, College Summit’s Board Chair (at top of this post).

These two men defy description. They are my models for leadership, selflessness, commitment, raw intellect fused with an overflowing heart, vision, passion, and humility (there are plenty of other adjectives I could use). For evidence of their leadership abilities, look no further than College Summit’s recognition as a 2006 Skoll Awardee, or this year’s U.S. Social Entrepreneur of the Year Award from the Schwab Foundation, or  its multi-year recognition by Fast Company as one of the nation’s top ‘social capitalists changing the world.’

It was a real treat to be able to reconnect with Chuck and J.B., now a couple years removed from my stint with College Summit. I’ve grown, and traversed many miles, literally and figuratively. In many ways, seeing them was a come-full-circle experience that put me back in touch with my core again.

For all the mind-boggling enormity of the challenges facing our people and our planet, it’s nice to know there is a community of kindred spirits in which I—and anyone passionate about scalable social change—will always find a home.  

A small world indeed.

My hair is on fire. I sat in on what was the most interesting (and personally inspiring) session yet. It was on empathy and ethics—those unseen foundations that drive so many of us to be or aspire to be social entrepreneurs.

What made it so blazingly insightful? The panel broke the silence on the unseen forces that lie at the root of so many of our social ills—anger, disconnectedness, and apathy. Rather than spending another two hours discussing well-worn topics like developing partnerships with corporations or measuring social impact, the distinguished panelists got deep about the need to develop a more empathetic, emotionally literate and interconnected society.

But how do we think about developing empathy as parents, educators, policymakers and organizational leaders?  The panelists—Mary Gordon, Jill Vialet, Bill Drayton, and Kirk Hanson—represented some interesting perspectives for pursuing this lofty societal vision. You could feel the energy and intensity in the room, with audience members clamoring to share their personal reflections and questions.

Is spreading empathy and creating an emotionally literate society the new, ultimate challenge for social entrepreneurship?  Judging by the comments of panelists and audience, it could be the only way to create a world where everyone is a changemaker. Or as Mary Gordon, the glowing and wise entrepreneur who has brought empathy education to thousands of youth, put it, “This is not just about people ceasing to do bad things. This is about growing good people.”

For me, this panel was personal. It made plain and clear that my desire for human connectedness which has driven me to take up meditation and other consciousness-expanding practices (not the drug-induced variety mind you) is intensely interwoven with my interest in social entrepreneurship. I’m curious to know to what extent this is true for others in the social edge community and hoping the conversation started today continues writ large.
 

It’s Wednesday…the first full day of the Forum.  Determined to get there early to mingle, the BBL headed over to the Said Business School an hour before the morning panels were scheduled to begin.

Turning through the revolving glass doors, I felt like I was entering Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory.  What delights would the day have in store?

Front and center waiting at reception was Priya Haji, a Haas alum and founder of World of Good.  World of Good was a Global Social Venture Competition winner in 2005 and Priya has been leading the organization on a rapid growth trajectory ever since. 

After our introductions, Priya mentioned how lucky she felt to be at the Skoll World Forum.  She feels lucky?  She’s a real social entrepreneur who works everyday to sell fair trade gift & accessories from around the world.  I’m the one who is feeling quite lucky to be here in her company.

Mike, Omar and I headed to the back room to find coffee.  Sitting down at a table, I was taken aback to find Jacqueline Novogratz, Founder and CEO of the Acumen Fund, sitting at the next table with Brian Trelstad, CIO of the Acumen Fund.   Wow…this is way better than a stream full of chocolate!

Jacqueline Novogratz is one of my personal heroes for a number of reasons. I have repeatedly watched her TED talks for inspiration and encouragement. If you haven’t heard her tell the story of the blue sweater, then check it out!  It’s powerful stuff!

Omar, Mike and I got to meet Jacqueline a little bit later.  After a brief exchange, she asked each of us how we got involved in the field and what we were planning to do this summer. 

I noticed this was the same conversation approach that Paul Farmer had taken with Omar last night.  But I didn’t want to just talk about me.  I wanted to express my gratitude to her.  So I just opened up and told her how much I appreciated her work.  It was good to thank her in person. 

By close to 10am I had met two amazing female role models in the field. 

I knew this day would continue to be humbling!

The opening plenary was hosted in the Sheldonian Theatre, which is really old, really ornate and, well, really uncomfortable.



The roundtable featured four amazing woman. From right to left: Jody Williams, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate for her work leading the International Campaign to Ban Landmines; Karen Tse, who has helped bring legal justice and due process to several developing countries; Nafis Sadik, who has fought for reproductive rights and HIV/AIDS prevention throughout the world, and the moderator, Pat Mitchell.



Omar and Roxanne pointing at the driving rain from inside the safety of the tent that housed the opening night networking reception. People were SOAKED!



The same two-thirds of the BBL with our beloved Social Edge superiors, Victor and Jill. Thanks for this opportunity, guys!

Walking into Keble College was like arriving for dinner at Harry Potter’s Hogwarts.  Well, not exactly.  This college was the original choice for the film’s directors, but they ended up filming the Great Hall scene at the Christ Church College down the road.  It was still absolutely breathtaking.



I had a great discussion with Peter Kenyon, the Operations Director for International Bridges to Justice.  A Stanford MBA, Peter transitioned from being a for-profit entrepreneur to helping manage a leading social enterprise.  His role was one with which I could identify…I may not have THE brilliant idea to start a social enterprise, but I could see myself helping grow a great idea. 

As we talked, the different challenges for scaling a social enterprise became more clear to me.  It seems like social entrepreneurs are more inextricably tied to the organization they create than in the for-profit world I come from.  Certain foundations only want to fund an organization if the social entrepreneur agrees to stay at the helm for a number of years.

You would be hard pressed to find a venture capital firm that worked the same way.  Coming from Yahoo!, I am skeptical that the company would have scaled the way it did if Jerry Yang and David Filo had stayed in charge of the organization.  Sure, they had the vision, but they brought in a CEO and COO pretty soon after the infusion of cash from Sequoia Capital because they knew their idea had the potential to grow quickly.

Questions come to mind:

What do young social entrepreneurs do if they start something great?  Do they recruit strong management, and if so, how do they stay involved? How do foundations and other funders want them to stay involved?

Are there 'serial social entrepreneurs' or are these evocative entrepreneurs tied to their organization as long as it is successful?

Do social entrepreneurs even want an exit strategy or are these businesses their life work?

I clearly have homework to do!

OG

The second half of the plenary session included a remarkable panel of 4 women.  The topic of discussion between Karen Tse, Jody Williams, Nafis Sadik and Pat Mitchell focused on their experiences working cross-culturally which led to an engaging discussion among these very authentic leaders. 

A highlight of the discussion was when Jody admitted to the audience, “I’m confused by social entrepreneurship.  If I’m a social entrepreneur, am I still an activist?  Am I a capitalist?  I’m still having a lot of problems with that term.”

I hear ya, Jody.  I’m a bit confused too.

In the articles I have read recently, there is a noticeably broader application of the term.   Yet, I’ve worked with leaders of organizations in the US and Europe who are operating hybrid non-profit organizations but don’t identify with the label “social entrepreneur.” 

The definition is not just unclear for the entrepreneurs themselves.  Earlier in the day I joined a group of professors and investors in the field discussing the possibility of creating a database of social entrepreneurs.  The group had a tough time coming to a consensus of what key criteria defined a social entrepreneur.  Do you rely on the Skoll criteria?  What about Ashoka or Schwab?  Or a broader combination of all of those? It was still a point the group agreed needed clarification after 20 minutes of exchange.

Although the concept of social entrepreneurship may have arrived, it’s clear that this new term in one that everyone is still getting comfortable adopting.

Oh, the Opening Plenary…the true beginning of the Skoll World Forum 2008…and the rain.

We ducked out of the showers and into the Sheldonian Theatre and waited to climb the steep, winding staircase up to the uncomfortable wood bench seating in the balcony.   I couldn't believe we were sitting in a theatre that was over 339 years old!  That's over 200 years older than South Hall, the oldest university building in all of California, located on the UC Berkeley campus.

As soon as the lights dimmed, I sensed that drama and maybe a bit of dosing was about to unfold. 

Jeff Skoll was inspirational…declaring that social entrepreneurs had officially “arrived” on the world stage, citing new levels of recognition and awareness.  I have to admit that as someone interested in entering this “field” which is unlike most pursue in business school, it was encouraging to hear Jeff’s words and gaze out at the auditorium packed with people who share his point of view.  Are my future colleagues sitting in this room?

Lord Anthony Gidden’s talk built on Jeff’s call for climate change work and went further to directly appeal to the social entrepreneurs in the room to help with this complex issue.  I wondered how large of a role social entrepreneurs will play in making progress on this issue?  Will they be a key catalyzing force as they have been on other social issues?

I winced a few times during the session, as Americans were called out in the conversation.  Lord Gidden’s suggested that Americans are teaching the British people to want large refrigerators, like the tall standing one I have at home.  Is that true or are large refrigerators simply better suited for the British lifestyle of today?  I hate to argue with a Lord, but as a marketer I can’t help but think this change in British consumer behavior may be driven by a shift in needs completely unrelated to my American habits.

Luckily, Al Gore saved the day again!  Even Lord Gidden had to praise Gore for his work promoting the dialogue on climate change.  My sense is that if you meet a European, start the conversation by telling them you are a big supporter of Al Gore and you'll be on the right foot.

The rain started pouring (on queue?) as Lord Gidden’s speech concluded. 

As daunting as the challenge of climate change may seem to me alone, I’ve met brilliant students from programs all over Berkeley who are dedicated to this issue and run a fantastic multi-disciplinary club called BERC.  Their stories and passion for this issue helped me have hope for the future.  I can see first-hand that emerging leaders from my generation are already joining others who are working against the clock to achieve large-scale changes.  Americans see the storm clouds in the future too, Lord Giddens, and are entering the field in droves.