Business Social Ventures - Critical Path for Global Impact?

Ashoka / Changemakers


Welcome! First, a brief personal introduction: I have been editing, writing for, and developing Ashoka's Changemakers.net Web site since it was launched in June 1998 – so for these past five years I have been an observer and chronicler of social entrepreneurs. I was fortunate to attend the Grameen-Ashoka Dialogue, where a group of social entrepreneurs met to have a look at the Grameen Bank's growing cluster of business-social ventures, and to begin a discussion about how the social sector can adopt business-social ventures to alleviate poverty and scale-up their operations to the global level.

 
Here are some questions for your consideration in this discussion:  

• How can business-social ventures accelerate the eradication of poverty, and what is the role of social entrepreneurs in this process?
• What are the core values that must not be compromised when pursuing business objectives?
• How do we manage the transition from citizen sector social organizations to business-social ventures?
• What are the legal, institutional and cultural barriers to creating business-social ventures, and how do we overcome them?
• What types of incentives are needed to facilitate the transition from donor-funded activities to market-based initiatives?

Toby Beresford - Nov 11, 2003 9:36 am (#2 Total: 26)
MicroAid


Thanks for inviting me to join the discussion.

I think asking what are the core values that must be retained in pursuing business objectives with a social enterprise is a good question.

Harking back to a previous social edge discussion I still like these three key descriptions of the "balanced market economy" we aim to create: pro-poor, pro-environment, pro-women.

I am sure we can find other values, how about "pro-community" and "pro-healthy"?

Kind Regards

Toby Beresford MicroAid.net

Kris Herbst - Nov 11, 2003 9:58 am (#3 Total: 26)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Hi Toby,

Good to hear from you. I like the values you have cited (pro- poor, environment, women, community and health). Here is how some of the participants in the Grameen-Ashoka Dialogue summarized their view of critical core values:

We must be clear on where we get our funds for investment because we cannot take funds from businesses that may not be responsible. So from that comes our values:

• Funding must come from sources that are socially and environmentally responsible
• High moral and professional ethics for conduct
• Investments must generate profits for social purposes and not excessive personal gain, and must eradicate poverty
• There must be cross-subsidization between for-profits and non-profits working in cooperation
• Services must be affordable for the poor and if the costs are higher, these must be covered by revenues generated in other ways (same as previous point)
• Empowerment of people throughout the entire process

Karin Hillhouse - Nov 11, 2003 10:58 am (#4 Total: 26)
Ashoka - Changemakers.net


Thanks, Toby, for going to the "heart" of the topic!

Among core values we'll surely want "pro human rights" in some version or other. It's, of course, hugely overarching, and as such perhaps too broad to be usefully applied to daily business/social decision-making. Still, there must be some practical way to think about and integrate human rights principles into social enterprises modeled along the lines of profit-making businesses.

Business-social venturers might adopt the familiar core principle: "First do no harm." It would set the bar high and compel hard but meaningful choices.

I'm grateful to Social Edge for hosting this discussion. This "business-social venture" language is evolving fast in the corporate, social, philanthropic, and development communities, and it's one I want to learn and understand.

I've been collecting resources for the Changemakers.net Library since its launch more than five years ago. And this discussion will help a lot in that work.

Over the last couple of years, I've become increasingly interested in the social-business intersection, what it means, and what its prospects are. Jed Emerson's Blended Value Map surveys the landscape particularly well. A quick look there makes evident that the "business-social ventures" we're talking about in this discussion are change enterprises far different from corporations acting socially responsible and nonprofits earning income.

Cheers,
Karin

iieo - Nov 11, 2003 8:01 pm (#5 Total: 26)


The utility and farm coops that we have in Wisconsin are a good example of non-profit member ownerd corporations that could be used to facilitate renewable energy and hybrid/battery transportation.

The low cost of windpower electricity could provide a basis for these institutions. Members could purchase the power for home use through the existing power grid, even if it was generated in high windspeed areas 1000's of miles away.

Vehicles could be converted to hybrid/battery power systems and leased to members, even by the trip. So that they could use a vehicle once a week or once a day, and be charged only for that use.

This is an effective solution in the develpoed world as well as the developing world I think. In the US regulatory reform to get fgull fair access to the power grid may be necessary, but that grid runs through public right of ways. There are already laws that make public utilities buy power from individual customers with wind generators.

Bio-fuels as the back of fuel for the hybrid/battery vehicle systems could be made from farm and food manufacturing waste using wind and solar which would take the present high costs out of ethanol from corn and bio-diesel from oil seed crops. This is a natural mix for a rural farming area coop and utility. But it is just as feasible to have coop members in cities who belong to these rural based coops too.

The possibility of organic food production and distribution within the coop framework is possible too.

The new technologies of renewable energy replacing fossil fuels attacks social problems at the economic base, and applying them through a coop structure is the perfect way to break the monopoly hold of conventional technology that is destroying spaceship Earth.

The political and regulatory aspects of this whole thing need work, as do the financial and organizational fronts. By looking back over the farm and utility coops of the past and present and recruiting people who built and ran them, this could be acomplished without big government programs. We the people working directly would be able to make it happen.

Th

Denise Crossan - Nov 12, 2003 3:49 am (#6 Total: 26)


I am currently carrying out research into the creation of a classification system that will identify a spectrum of social commercial firms (social enterprises) leading to a point along the spectrum where businesses become commercial firms with a substantial social emphasis, either intended or not. My research focuses on the socially commercial and commerically social sectors in the border regions of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and I am particulary interested in those commerical social businesses who have internationalised to see if a model can be developed to assist the potential growth of social enterprises. Whilst I am at the beginning on my research on the subject, some findings have indicated in Ireland that the value to the socio-economy of commerically social firms has been significantly undervalued and unsupported and their lose to a more market driven location can have immense social and community infrastructural impact. I would be interested in discussing the findings of Grameen - Ashoka Dialogue to investigate the parrallels with my own work Denise Crossan University of Ulster da.crossan@ulster.ac.uk

Toby Beresford - Nov 12, 2003 4:41 am (#7 Total: 26)
MicroAid


Hi Kris

I enjoyed the link to the article and your points above.

Ensuring service affordability is a key issue for us.

Our (MicroAid's) current model is that everybody pays the same flat amount for the same service ($80 a month). Our service is a subscription for communities to use the MicroAid online toolkit which gives them a professional management tool for planning local projects, generates their own website, makes proposals for resource providers (donors, local gov), receives and tracks resources, sends automated emails as activities are implemented and ensures effective reporting.

We think that poor communities who cannot afford the service need to find subsidies for it from existing donors (in the same way a donor might sponsor office space rental or local government might maintain a road to a remote village). Once they reach a break-even point, where use of MicroAid brings in (say) >$160 a month facilitator revenue, then we think they are now able to pay the subscription themselves.

In our first few customers we found that they are UK charities that are sponsoring MicroAid subscriptions for their existing network of community organisations. We think this is great.

What do you think of this overall pricing approach? I would appreciate any commments you might have. Perhaps you or others know of examples of people who have tried similar pricing models in different service areas. Are there alternatives you could suggest that we might be able to try?

I liked the aurolab cross-subsidisation mechanism example in one of the changemakers articles I read, however variable pricing dependent on means is pretty tricky when you're trying to keep things as simple as possible.

Kind Regards

Toby

David Martin - Nov 12, 2003 12:13 pm (#8 Total: 26)
Researching & designing financial services for low-to-moderate income Americans


I like the discussion from Toby, Kris, Karen and others on the foundational core values that drive the strategy and actions of a “business-social venture.” (honestly, I’m still trying to figure out the difference between this term and “social enterprise”). I too believe there are foundational principles that should drive the corporate objective.

I’d like to mention one area that seems untapped to me, yet holds vast potential for positive social change. Consider that most startup enterprises are either displacing current business demand or creating a new demand for products and services. Must we strive to re-create the wheel, literally re-creating the entire world economy with new “business-social ventures” that will leave a positive legacy instead of a negative one, that will solve problems instead of creating them? I am much more of an advocate of redesigning currently existing corporations, but to do this requires a deep look into the foundational aspects of why business exists as it does today. What are the conceptual flaws of current business operation that have caused corporations to ignore “externalities” in favor of maximizing “value” (read: “debt/ equity holders’ and executives’ value only”), while minimizing or destroying value for other stakeholder groups, including customers, employees and the environment?

Consider that at the foundation, we have several theoretical and practical flaws for the corporate objectives of for-profit business. Paul Hawken and Jed Emerson have outlined some of these flaws; Jed describes “blended value creation” as the true corporate objective. I’m working on an article to address these issue and I’d like to contribute a few more ideas to this discussion:

What is causing some of the negative outcomes we are trying to alleviate? Myths we hold onto regarding current business theory and practice include: · Quantification as a basis for describing reality: numbers can tell the whole story · Markets operate rationally and reflect the true value of goods, services and resources · Maximizing shareholder value is the best corporate objective because it eventually creates wealth for everyone · Management theories and frameworks are adequate for helping managers navigate corporations through complex governmental, civic and social issues · The corporate entity operates like a person and has similar accountability

These and other myths serve to perpetuate negative outcomes of corporate practice. It seems strange to me that for all the analytical thinking that has gone into business, the system of business itself is not congruent to the stated and apparent values of the majority of the worlds religions and philosophies. Is business excluded from moral, philosophical and spiritual values? Certainly not.

Back to the point. The topic of foundational values or principles certainly applies here. I have compiled a list of eight principles that I believe puts business closer to working for, instead of against, the majority of all stakeholders: 1) Practice cooperation and non-competition. 2) Create and uphold 100% transparency with all stakeholder groups (customers, employees, investors, community, the environment, etc.) for all critical issues. 3) Rethink pricing structures to encompass more of a “pay-for-value” system or other systems where trust and true value creation are incorporated into the pricing equation. 4) Environmental sustainability is not an afterthought but the primary consideration. “Consider the impact for seven generations” should be the very first service and manufacturing design principle, not the last. 5) Create a new investor payoff that includes non-financial returns. Diminish the idea of infinite monetary payoffs (i.e. stock prices rising to the moon) and instead focus on sustainable, triple-bottom line value creation. Create new investment instruments to serve in this fashion. 6) For larger corporations, strive to serve employees first, instead of last, especially employees near or at the bottom of the corporate hierarchy. Employees are the primary customers of any business. Honor, respect and empowerment should be the hallmarks of the management/ employee relationship. 7) Trust and Stewardship: products and services as a partnership with customers. Unfortunately, many large businesses today design products and services to minimize value to the customer while maximizing revenue to the company. Another way to think of this principle is this: business must look at their partnership with customers as though they were serving someone in their own family. How would products and services change if businesses thought they were designing and fulfilling them for their mothers and fathers? 8) A new corporate objective. How do we succinctly state an enlightened corporate objective that includes a triple bottom line? One way I like to think about this is to say that business has the goal of creating sustained (and sustainable) abundance for the vast majority of the people on earth while leaving a positive legacy for future generations. How is this achieved?

Can you imagine if for-profit businesses redesigned themselves according to the above-mentioned principles, or other similarly intentioned principles? My sense is that these principles are multiplicative in power—each one greatly empowers the next and are much more as a whole than the sum of the parts. And I’m sure there are others that can be added to make this an even better set of operating guidelines.

To restate my original thesis: I believe that transforming currently existing for-profit enterprises holds the vast majority of potential for short-to-medium term positive societal change.

Kris Herbst - Nov 12, 2003 2:17 pm (#9 Total: 26)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Wow - this conversation is taking off!

Welcome to Denise, good to have your view from Northern Ireland/Irish Republic. Your current research emphasizes what a hot emerging topic this is throughout the world. Ashoka is especially interested in your focus -- building a bridge that allows business entrepreneurs to help social entrepreneurs cross the gap to commercial success. And vice versa: social entrepreneurs can help businesses, whose ethics are in alignment with the social sector, to create "deep" social benefits (as opposed to assuming a patina of social respectability). I look forward to hearing more from you!

Toby - from your vantage point with bases in London and Jakarta, and customers in Bangladesh, you pose some great questions. Let me send them back out to our growing number of participants who may have some valuable experience in these areas: what about flat-rate pricing for poor communities that must then seek their own donor funds until they reach a break-even point with the tools you give them? Versus Aurolab's tiered pricing -- charging customers with wealth the going market rate and using the profits to subsidize poor customers?

David - you provide some deep analysis and important questions. No surprise, since you are writing a book on the latest trends in the business world relating to social entrepreneurship and blended value (aka the double or triple bottom line)! You advocate redesigning currently existing corporations, rather than reinventing the wheel with “business-social ventures.” This raises an important question in my mind: what can the established corporations do best, or do exclusively? And when do social entrepreneurs bring a unique mindset -- i.e., an ability to envision and realize systemic changes that uncover social benefits rarely, if ever, previously imagined -- thus transforming society in a way that is not possible for business corporations?

Mark Swilling, a participant in the Grameen-Ashoka Dialogue, argued eloquently that the old-line corporations must simply die, they are beyond redemption. A realistic point of view? On the other hand, let me offer a case study of a large multinational corporation that is moving toward a business model that empowers the poor. And there is the view (see Prahalad et al) that there is a huge opportunity for big business to create powerful social benefits by engaging with the world's poorest people.

Your thoughts?

Karin Hillhouse - Nov 12, 2003 2:27 pm (#10 Total: 26)
Ashoka - Changemakers.net


You're offering an attractive case here. The common (uncommon!) sense only makes one want to know and understand more. I'd love to know more about the implementation constraints and what the cast of characters would need to look like for something as far-reaching and apparently sound as this to be realized.

The scenario you've outlined strikes me as a perfect one for business-social venture research. I'm guessing that the resulting "business" plan would lay out the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, and thus, in turn, go a long way to seeing business-social ventures more clearly.

Perhaps participants here can help with the SWOT analysis. Also there may be research opportunities in this hypothetical case compelling enough to attract business school professors to demonstrate well the legal and institutional barriers to implementation and measures for mitigating them.

Can everyone think about this and also bring in others to assist?

Thanks!

Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn - Nov 12, 2003 2:38 pm (#11 Total: 26)
Sohodojo


While we resonate with the spirit of this event and discussion, we cannot help but cringe at some of the statements herein. Not that they're wrong nor improper, but that they carry an implicit assumption about how the world works, and where we will find solutions for social and environmental/planetary problems.

Kris, in your bullet list of questions to consider for this event you list, "What are the legal, institutional and cultural barriers to creating business-social ventures, and how do we overcome them?" To our mind, the most detrimental assumption underlying the best intentions is that big problems need big solutions and that, of necessity, drives us to the pursuit of scale.

Since the problems of poverty, injustice, and other social ills are so grand and global, we jump too quickly to the conclusion that significant social change can only come from scaling up the organizations that tackle these problems. The mistaken assumption is that organizations and their actions produce significant social change. We believe, however, it is ideas and the infection of ideas from person-to-person that truly produces historic and global social change. And such Idea Power is as likely to be exercised in the Small Is Good World as it is in the Big Is Good World.

Take for example the idea of agriculture. Long before the Internet and global telecommunications, here's an idea that took root in one individual or small group of hunter gatherers and, arguably for better or for worse, eventually transformed the human condition and the fate of our planet. It didn't take the formation of a for profit or not-for-profit organization to nurture and spread this innovation, it just happened. Sure, various organizations have been influential in shaping agricultural development. But these organizations are instruments of, or enablers of, the idea of agriculture.

Let's take an example that is perhaps less grand but more specific to the business-social venture topic of discussion. That is, let's look at Toby and Richard Beresford's MicroAid company. What is exciting and revolutionary about MicroAid is not the company nor its technology platform. What is exciting and revolutionary about MicroAid is the idea that international development can be done "in the small" on a person-to-person basis. What has always been the domain of nations and large international aid organizations is being transformed as it is realized in the Small Is Good World through the business-social venture of MicroAid.

In all likelihood, the lasting and significant contribution that Toby and Richard Beresford will make to the extension of the flight of Spaceship Earth will not be the creation of a long-lived legal entity, MicroAid. Rather it will be the infection of their powerful idea that international development can be effectively practiced as a personal and small business enterprise.

We look forward to the evolution of the discussions during this event, and we promise to consistently contribute ideas and opinions from the Small Is Good side of the fence.

--Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn--

Karin Hillhouse - Nov 12, 2003 2:54 pm (#12 Total: 26)
Ashoka - Changemakers.net


Just to add hot-off-the-press news as grist for this discussion, here's an article that appeared today in South Africa's Cape Business News:

Golding goes the empowerment route

Opportunities exist for potential entrepreneurs to become involved in the Pam Golding Property group's empowerment initiative. Delivered to the emerging market via a turnkey franchise solution, the franchisees will enjoy the support and service infrastructure of the group's franchise company, under the globally respected PGP brand.

Being spearheaded by John Herbst, a 23 year veteran of real estate in South Africa, the empowerment project is broad based with the aims of extending a unique, indigenous real estate solution to the emerging market, creating new business opportunities for entrepreneurs from previously disadvantaged backgrounds, providing employment opportunities for those wishing to enter the industry, creating opportunities for affordable housing by unlocking new areas for development, and also creating business opportunities through allied services such as building systems and construction companies. A particularly strong emphasis on the empowerment of black women is core to the business model.

Says Dr Andrew Golding, CE of the PGP group: "This innovative empowerment initiative embraces the BEE Charter in its entirety, with a strong emphasis on skills transference and training. We see this as a complementary extension of our core business as a supplier of a full range of property services, into a new market segment, and which will enable us to capitalise on the extensive synergies with our existing business units throughout the PGP group.

"With his considerable experience and skills gained in developing an extensive franchise operation, John Herbst is ideally placed to drive this exciting new project and is currently in the process of forming alliances with strategic partners, including those who provide end-user finance," says Dr Golding.

Says Herbst: "Initially to be launched in Gauteng, the new venture will be rolled out nationally and will include both rural and urban areas - including projects in key areas identified in inner city areas. Key components will be unlocking dormant potential among aspiring black people, and opening the door to wealth creation through property ownership in the black emerging market.

Kris Herbst - Nov 12, 2003 3:09 pm (#13 Total: 26)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Hi Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn,

I'm so glad you consistently speak persuasively for the "small is good" point of view. Certainly I would want the core values of business-social ventures to retain the creativity and humanity found at the person-to-person scale. So I'd like to respond to you with an enthusiastic "yes!" . . . and . . . (not a "yes, but").

The "and" I will contribute here is a conference presentation titled "People First: Pursuing a Just Economy" by Mary Coyle, director of the Coady International Institute at St. Francis Xavier University. In it, she says "Dr. Saluddin Ahmed of the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee taught me two important lessons. He says small is beautiful but in many cases big is necessary. He is referring to the scale of effort and resources required at a variety of levels to have the impact needed to attain economic justice in the world."

Susan Davis - Nov 12, 2003 4:22 pm (#14 Total: 26)


Hi Kris,

I love the quote you cited from the Coady presentation, "small is beautiful but in many cases big is necessary." I think it was originally coined by F.H. Abed, the founder and CEO of BRAC in Bangladesh but Salauddin has worked with him as the Deputy at BRAC for years so by now it doesn't matter. I know it's a key lesson that I also learned from witnessing these leading social entrepreneurs in action when I lived in Bangladesh in the '80s. At that time, Abed, Yunus and others felt a real urgency to push themselves and their institutions to grow as fast as possible. Why? It was not an act of ego or desire for 'market dominance.' Rather it was their knowledge that the opportunity cost of staying small or growing slowly was unacceptably high for people. You could visibly see the difference in the stunting and wasting of children of women who had or did not have access to join a self-help group for savings, credit and other support. The kids whose mothers were members of BRAC and Grameen and other terrific organizations were invariably taller and healthier than those without access. They knew how critical the first six years are in the development of a child. Often it will determine their prospects in latter life. Too many malnourished, under-developed children later can retard progress and national development. So they didn't wait for the military government to change. Instead they pushed forward into uncomfortably new terrain to try to stop the injustice and misery. They also backed the idea of starting Ashoka in Bangladesh and encouraged a new generation of social entrepreneurs to start initiatives to solve problems. Everybody can be a changemaker.

I find hope in large and small efforts. The important thing is the aggregate impact: have we made a dent in the problem? With microcredit, we (those of us who joined the Microcredit Summit Campaign spearheaded by RESULTS) decided to set a global goal in 1997 and encourage everyone to play a part in reaching it. At that time, we could only count 7.6 million of the poorest people in the world who had access to these income-generating loans. At the begining of this year, 41.6 million poorest people had access.

Our goal is to reach 100 million of the poorest familes, especially through the women of those families with credit for self-employment and other business services. Over 2,400 institutions reported their client totals to produce this huge result. Each of those women has an average of 5 in the household. This is the first time the world ever tried to really reach the poorest people sharing our planet in a way that works. We know their names. This is not a number generated by an economic model. I bet that Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn would applaud this kind of 'scale' as it builds on what is best about our humanity and the power of individuals and communities.

with best wishes, Susan Davis

vernhughes - Nov 12, 2003 5:25 pm (#15 Total: 26)
Social Entrepreneurs Network


Kris's introductory questions are the right questions, and Susan's use of the phrase "small is beautiful but big is sometimes necessary" is vitally important.

Here in a nutshell is my perspective from having been involved the various social enterprises, co-ops and social ventures in Australia for about 15 years or so:

. Most of the interesting ventures we have are small in scale, localised in character, and belatedly recognising the need to scale up, not for growth for its own sake, but to make a bigger impact upon the issues/problems/disadvantages that they are seeking to address.

. However, our ventures are struggling with this question of whether replication should be done through franchising, or other commercially-oriented formats, or whether the idiosyncratic character of the ventures is lost in this process. This is a dilemma.

. Most corporates are interested only in charity or 'good works' kind of ventures rather that those that are genuinely market-based. This is partly due to their familiarity only with the charity sector. It is also because the genuinely market-based social enterprises tend to be small in scale and localised. So it is a kind of vicious circle.

. We are only beginning to realise that developing inter-related enterprises in a particular locality or industry is the road to strength. Most of our ventures are one-off initiatives - a health centre here, a housing venture there, etc.

. Funders or donors or philanthropists tend to be hightly influenced by political and cultural fashions. Hence they are interested in ventures with indigenous communties or the environment or youth or particular ethnic groups (but not all ethnic groups), whereas white working class communities ("white trash" to pardon the use of that rather awful phrase) are not fashionable and not particularly fun to work with. But that is where the overwhelming need is in our society. And because these communities are not defined by ethnicity or a minority status of one kind or another, they rarely are the focus of innovative projects.

A few thoughts for starters. Thanks for this valuable discussion.

Vern Hughes

David Martin - Nov 12, 2003 5:55 pm (#16 Total: 26)
Researching & designing financial services for low-to-moderate income Americans


Kris, you raise some excellent points regarding corporations and their ability to change. No doubt it is a paradigm shift for corporations to reconfigure themselves according to some of the principles I’ve outlined in my earlier post. By their nature, corporations are good at creating efficiency and scale. So to answer your question, perhaps the larger social issues and certainly many of the consumer market issues would be a good place for redesigned business to have an impact. Perhaps the differences we are talking about between social enterprise and redesigned businesses are semantics—it takes a social entrepreneurial mindset to carry out the kinds of redesign work I’ve mentioned, so that the resultant corporation would, in fact, be a social enterprise.

I’d caution against making judgments that the form a business takes (i.e., a corporation) would preclude it from being able to transform society. The corporate form is an organizational structure with positive and negative traits that would make it better attempting some things than others. I certainly don’t advocate the disappearance of the civic or social benefit sector organizations for that reason: they are better at certain things because of their structure and the types of people they attract to run them. Let the intention of the enterprise dictate its best form.

As for whether corporations are beyond redemption…that remains to be seen. I’d argue that it is the people, not the corporate entity that will decide. People need to choose this new paradigm we are in the process of creating: a growing sub-culture of capitalism that will give workers new opportunities to create meaning in their work life and customers new levels of service and value. I believe people want this change and it is just a matter of getting working models out there for them to try.

Karin Hillhouse - Nov 14, 2003 2:46 pm (#17 Total: 26)
Ashoka - Changemakers.net


In addition to the SEA publications already cited in the Resources thread, I want to make sure everyone knows about SEA's official listserv, npEnterprise Forum, which you can monitor or participate in.

News, events, and spirited exchange about issues and information from around the world make this service a most valuable asset for anyone pursuing or thinking about business-social ventures large and small.

Here's the link where you can sign up: http://www.npenterprise.net/

marthaliles - Nov 14, 2003 5:27 pm (#18 Total: 26)


Thank you for having the discussion in Spanish and English.

I think that having the discussion in two languages enables more people to join the discussion. Next, is to expand the discussion to more languages.

Albina Ruiz - Nov 26, 2003 8:29 am (#19 Total: 26)
Ciudad Saludable


Business social ventures could be a very useful tool to reduce poverty by empowering poor people to improve their income. Therefore, social entrepreneurs have to guide this process so as investments are rationally used and solve problems. We also have the chance to empower the poor by giving them the possibility of crating a sense of ownership. We can open new windows of opportunities for local development, this will result in new investments because profits will be spent in the local market. The goods produced in this communities will boost the local economy and solve a series of social issues including, health, food and educational problems. But we also have to take into account environmental and cultural externalities.

When looking for profits we should always keep our moral values. We have to respect other people as well as the environment. Profits need to be distributed among many people so as we can reduce poverty.

The transition from a traditional non-profit organization to a social enterprise has to be accompanied be a very careful analysis of market niches, especially in those areas where we have experience.

Radu Seserman - Nov 28, 2003 7:29 pm (#20 Total: 26)


Hi Martin, Please allow me a few thoughts on your message. First a quick introduction of myself, I was born in Romania where I lived for about 30 years and then moved to the US where I have been living for 12 years now. I agree with you in general, but I disagree in some of the specifics. You are right, business must be more social oriented. The problem is this cannot be enforced. I am looking to find a set of principles to 'guide' business too. I always have in my mind the code of chivalry; it was such a great attempt to establish the rules for the society but it failed. Why? Because we are humans with qualities but with defects too. Any attempt to create a set of socio-economic principles based too heavily on good humans will fail because, as the old saying goes, it takes only one apple in the basket to spoil all of them. The laws of supply and demand, or competition, work regardless of human character; just society needs the competition to be fair. That is why I would say your first principle should be more like: encourage competition but make sure no one becomes too powerful or dominant. The second principle I think is critical. 100% transparency in every aspect of the business except for R&D is very crucial. I would make 'open books' accounting a requirement for any social oriented organization. I would really appreciate any reply. Best wishes, Radu

Lira - Dec 2, 2003 1:32 pm (#21 Total: 26)
Fundación Solidaridad


The Solidaridad Foundation buys hand-made products to poor women at a fair price after they leant how to calculate their labour and materials costs. After this process the Foundation sells the products and gets a profit which is used to finance other services. However we have found a series of tensions and temptations!!

- Poor women are marginalized and they do not have the possibility of having access to the market. This is our main objective! But: Their products are not the nicest and it is hard to sell them.

- Wealthy women offers top of the line products to sell in our stores and use the profit to invest it in order to help poor women. But: We know that these type of products will compete with other products and will not generate income to undeserved women.

- In order to empower poor women we have to invest a lot of time in terms of counseling and training. We know that if we use this time to sell their products we will get more profits. But: We are aware that every single step or decision we take will define our future as a social-venture entrepreneur.

Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn - Dec 3, 2003 1:57 pm (#22 Total: 26)
Sohodojo


Congratulations, Lira, on the exciting work you are doing with Fundación Solidaridad! Your experienced-based insights get to the fundamental challenges of marketplace competition for mission-driven social enterprises. That is, how do we compete in the open marketplace when we have the extra overhead of our mission-driven constituency service (in your case, business and craft skill development among your microenterprise network participants) on top of the standard 'burden' of production, marketing, and distribution costs faced by all businesses in the marketplace.

The sad fact is, that in most cases, you can't. But don't dispair. The full answer is that (in most cases, because there are always exceptions), you cannot compete in the open marketplaces of the Big Is Good World if your business is grounded in the realities of the Small Is Good World.

The more encouraging answer is that you can compete, but you have to think and act differently. Products and services offered by the Big Is Good World compete on price and 'everywhere all the time' distribution. Using factory-based automation and controlled production processes, Big Is Good World competitors will almost always win on price and standardized quality. Since Small Is Good competitors will most likely lose in the Big Is Good World's markets based on price and distribution, we need to shift the playing field.

The unique thing that Fundación Solidaridad has going for it are the stories of the women who make your products and the communities they improve by their successes. Big nameless, faceless corporations may make cheaper and higher quality products, but these corporations cannot wrap their products in the powerful stories that your products carry with them.

What we in the Small Is Good World need are new story-driven and game-oriented marketplaces that are powered by Who, How and Why purchase decision dynamics rather than trying to compete in the How Much and Where marketplaces of the Big Is Good World.

You will find underlying story-based (more so) and game-oriented (less so, but evolving) dynamics at work in the exciting social business of MicroAid.Net, an innovative Social Edge community member that is revolutionizing the domain of international aid using a Small Is Good strategy.

You will find additional information about these ideas on the Sohodojo web site. In particular, check out Nanocorps in the Dream Society: How 'Small is Good' Business Webs Will Compete in the Story-driven Marketplaces of the 21st Century which is inspired by the insights of Danish futurist, Rolf Jensen, in his most interesting book, The Dream Society: How the Coming Shift from Information to Imagination Will Transform Your Business. And although it may get a bit 'Deep Weeds' on the business modeling side of things, you will find additional information in The Yin-Yang of e-Commerce Engines

Lira, you are obviously deeply thinking about the business and marketing challenges of Fundación Solidaridad. So some of what we are saying here will come as no surprise. We would say, however, that we think the whole domain of highly-competitive, alternative marketplaces optimized to take advantage of the unique features of the Small Is Good World is yet in its infancy. We need additional applied research and development to make the kind of sustainable advances that we believe are possible. You and Fundación Solidaridad sound like ideal collaborators to work with Sohodojo and MicroAid as we explore and evolve these ideas further.

Keep up your good work,
--Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn--

Anne Perlman - Dec 4, 2003 10:42 am (#23 Total: 26)


The messages below reminded me of a pin that I received as a gift. It depicts a Native American dancer, and a piece of paper attached to it told the story and mythology behind it. Even more than the pin itself, I appreciated the story, and still have it in my jewelry box!

freddie - Jan 7, 2004 12:54 am (#24 Total: 26)
Kibera Community Youth Programme


I am new and would like to let you know me as a co-ordinator of a youth initiative from teh sprawling slums of Kibera in Nairobi,Kenya.I have been trying to find employment opportunities for youth living in this area but only volunteer positions has been forthcoming.I am now considering to help the youth start up small income generating projects for their self-sustanability and avoid dependancy.I would wish to know how to go about this and probably have some people who can help out by providing funds for this initiative that shall lead to a reduction in poverty levels amongst the youth in the slum. I would be happy to be intouch with anybody who can extensively advice and give a way forward to this initiative. Fredrick Ouko www.kcyp.kabissa.org

Toby Beresford - Jan 7, 2004 7:49 am (#25 Total: 26)
MicroAid


Dear Freddy

Without wanting to do too great a plug for our own social enterprise on a community forum, I think you should look at the MicroAid Manager online tools.The tools are designed and have been used in Indonesia for exactly your purpose: helping poor families set up small income generating projects.

The tools will help you by providing a self help process you can follow, ready to use micro-enterprise activities (40), products (300) and networking mechanisms by which you can build partner connections and raise funds using the connectivity of the internet.

If you think MicroAid will be of help then the first step is to find another, larger NGO, or an individual supporter, who is willing to subsidise the MicroAid monthly subscription for you and perhaps pay for some basic internet and MicroAid software training.

Have a look at our quick tour online at http://www.microaid.net. Please let me know what you think via this forum.

Comments and questions from others would be most welcomed - I'll try to answer any as best I can.

Kind Regards

Toby

jimfruchterman - Jan 8, 2004 1:24 pm (#26 Total: 26)
Benetech


Denise: I hope you draw your spectrum to include the nonprofit social enterprises. I often draw a continuum that ranges from Microsoft at the far right and the Red Cross at the far left. Social enterprises tend to be clustered in the middle around the for-profit/nonprofit dividing line. Sometimes enterprises move over that line in their life cycle, turning from a for-profit into a nonprofit or vice versa.

My joke here in Silicon Valley is that we're the deliberately nonprofit high technology company in the area!

Fraga - Nov 17, 2003 2:13 pm (#1 Total: 8)
Centro de Formación Popular "Renaciendo Juntos"


En primer lugar nosotras (Nuestra Organización ) en nuestra equipo creemos que actualmente todo proyecto que implique verdaedro desarrollo social debe de articular varias partes como tecnología adaptada , que no es más que tecnologías que hasta ahora se han manejado en Institutos técnicos, Universidades y otro centros para investigación , proyectos de tesis y otros , por parte de profesionales de distintas ramas que nunca se trasmiten a comunidades para que estas puedan ser implementadas , luego la parte de desarrollo social con transferencia de elementos sociales que puedan ser utilizados por los grupos para mejorar su trabajo y por supuesto el apoyo en un primer instante económico que puede ser créditos ó inversiones . Bueno nosotros actualmente estamos manejando dos proyectos en este sentido uno es un proyecto con una Cooperativa de productos elaborados con las algas que llegan a las playas y se estacionan allí, en ella planteamos diversificar productos como: fertilizantes, alimentos para aves , alimetos para ganado , tes digestivos y queremos articular una parte con huertos de acuicultura (ESTAMOS HACIENDO PRUEBAS CON UNA COOPERANTE JAPONESA) en hogares de pescadores-as para alimento (por su gran contenido nutricional) y venta de un tipo de alga que se puede utilizar en restaurantes , este es en la sede de Margarita y el otro es en Falcón que es servicios de recolección, reutilización y reciclaje de basura por parte de comunidades rurales en este proyecto se pretende formar a las comunidades en clasificación de su basura , luego en reutilización de residuos domésticos y en reciclaje para beneficio de las comunidades. En este proyecto se articulan varias organizaciones como alcaldía , comunidades, grupos y Ong , pues las comunidades venderían su servicio a la alcaldía , en el municipio que se piensa realizar se diseño el proyecto en conjunto con las comunidades pues es una necesidad ya que de 43 comunidades solo se recolecta basura en tres (3) unicamente. Aquí estamos estudiando con ellos desde realizar inversiones comunitarias para desarrollar el proyecto hasta solicitar créditos.

Pellizzari - Nov 18, 2003 8:46 am (#2 Total: 8)
La Usina - Fellow de Ashoka


La Usina, esta vendiendo servicios de coordinación de actividades de fortalecimiento para ONG´s y para personas con discapacidad, dentro de su estrategia de desarrollo, este es un canal. También vendemos capacitación a profesionales del área, por ej. sobre Valoración de Postura para personas que viven en silla de ruedas....

Estamos explorando la posibilidad de crear una cadena de comercio justo de bienes producidos por trabajadores con discapacidad en organizaciones sin fines de lucro, estamos evaluando la idea a través de un relevamiento de productos, pues detectamos que una de las mayores debilidades es la parte comercial. les contare mas adelante.

Aguilar - Nov 18, 2003 1:27 pm (#3 Total: 8)
Inventar


En INVENTAR hemos desarrollado una línea de artefactos que constituyen ayudas técnicas que permiten a las personas con discapacidad de desplazamiento, acceder a los diferentes pisos de una vivienda a los que denominamos “TECNOLOGIA PERUANA PARA LA INCLUSION”. Por ejemplo: algunos de estos productos son: La Silla Salva Escaleras Peruana y el Ascensor para Discapacitados. la característica principal de esta tecnología es la ACCESIBILIDAD ya que son productos completamente desarrollados con una TECNOLOGIA PROPIA haciendo uso de recursos (tanto humanos como materiales) locales. Aunque en el mercado internacional (primer mundo) existen otras versiones de estos productos, sus precios son astronómicos para un peruano promedio para tener una idea: una Silla Salva Escaleras fabricada en Estados Unidos puede llegar a costarle a un peruano, aquí en el Perú, la suma de US$ 9 700.00 en cambio la Silla Salva Escaleras Peruana con las mismas características puede llegar a costar US$ 1950.00 y nuestro Ascensor para Discapacitados puede costar la mitad del lo que cuesta un ascensor convencional de las mismas características (importado).

En el Peru existen mas de tres millones de personas con discapacidad de las cuales se estima que un millón doscientas mil tiene discapacidad física y la mayor parte de esta población simplemente no puede acceder a una tecnología que le permita su inclusión en la sociedad y este problema se agrava mas aun por que la actual politica de vivienda y construccion no prevee un modelo de vivienda iclusiva ignorando que todas las personas en algun momento de nuestras vidas estamos expuestos a sufrir problemas de desplazamiento ya sea como resultado de sufrir un accidente o por que llegamos a la tercera edad. Creo que con la Tecnología que hemos desarrollado podemos contribuir a que las personas con discapacidad tengan una oportunidad no solo para mejorar su calidad de vida sino por que buscamos GENERAR EMPLEO pues sabemos que es posible que a pesar de sus limitaciones, las personas con discapacidad -contando con la debida asesoria-pueden encargarse de producir y comercializar estos productos ofertandolos a un mercado nacional e incluso Latinoamericano con un nivel competitivo bastante interesante.

Para lograr este objetivo necesitamos implementar un CENTRO DE PRODUCCION Y FORMACION en el cual se desarrollara el proceso de produccion de modelos y se capacitaran a las personas con discapacidad en los diferentes procesos y areas que encierra esta tecnologia de este modo estaremos implementando una suerte de "negocio social" el mismo que generara los recursos economicos que garanticen su AUTOSOSTENIBILIDAD en el tiempo. Contamos con el apoyo de los medios de comunicacion para la difusin de nuestros productos e impulsar la comercializacion y por supuesto, con el aporte tecnico de INVENTAR.

Cervantes - Nov 19, 2003 12:23 pm (#4 Total: 8)
CORIAC


Me vivo mas en la modestia y algo cercano a la incertidumbre de la autosustentabilidad de los trabajos sociales como el nuestro, lo digo como institución no gubernamental, me explico, para una asociación civil, sin presupuesto gubernamental, nosotros hemos logrado financiamientos de otras fundaciones como Ford, MacArthur, gobiernos de los estados, UNICEF, la Secretariá de Desarrollo social del Gobiernos Federal, entre otros organismos. Lo que hemos hecho es bajarnos los salarios y tener infraestructura, además de cumplir con los proyectos presentados, Coriac cuenta con un local, equipo, publicaciones y modelos de trabajo con hombres etc...., Algunos de nuestros servicios y los mas que podemos los cobramos, talleres platicas, vendemos nuestras publicacións, sin embargo, qué empresa le interesa comprar un taller para disminuir la violencia masculina o promover la paternidad afectiva, etc.

Lo que si nos ha funcionado es vender nuestros talleres a cuanta institución, empresa o grupo nos lo solucita, y como comprenderas son las instituciones públicas y los organismos filantópicos los que les interesa parar la violencia masculina y mejorar la calidad de vida de la población PROMOVIENDO LA CULTURA DEL RESPETO, LA EUIDAD, LA NOVIOLENCIA EN CASA, Y TEMAS AFINES. ¿Cómo concencer a los empresarios y a la población para que pague la labor social que hacemos?.

Nos hace falta saber vender nuestros servicios, promoverlos, cobrar para que sean rentables a empresas, y muchas instituciones más, es decir no hemos sabido lograr ese componente de VALOR AGREGADO de nuestros servicios según la óptivca e intereses de grupos sociales y empresariales que deseen invertir en nosotros.

Por supuesto que me sobran argumentos de la importancia y benficios de nuestra labor. El punto es cómo pasar de emprendedores sociales con militancia en la noviolencia, la equidad y las relaciones de paz entre hombres y mujeres a empresarios .

Les doy una anecdota de por dénde veo mi atorón, una prima capacitadora de empresas me dijo un día tu como capacitador debes ser el mejor vestido de todos, etc. etc., mi opción de vida es esta, trabajar por la democracia en casa.... y no se cobrar y solo tengo un traje quizas por una enorme diferencia o pleito con los miraras y prácticas capitalistas extremas. Quizas si pongo primero el direo, salgo de pobre, pero el precio que pagaría es pervertir mi labor social....

Garcia - Nov 24, 2003 9:58 am (#5 Total: 8)
RASA - Fellow de Ashoka


Nos hemos planteado como estrategia la apropiación directa de todas las fases del proceso productivo. De esta forma, articulamos la producción, transformación y comercialización de nuestros productos agrícolas. En el caso del café, que es el cultivo predominante, hemos articulado todos los procesos de tal suerte que al productor se le paga hoy el doble de lo que recibiría en el mercado local. Ello, en razón de que contamos con agroindustrias así como un sistema de comercialización directa con otras redes sociales.

Madden - Nov 25, 2003 6:11 pm (#6 Total: 8)
Fellow Ashoka


Qué excelente oportunidad!!!! En realidad yo estoy tratando de impulsar 100 y hasta 300 ECOFINCAS DE PLANTAS MEDICINALES, AGRICULTURA ORGANICA Y CONSERVACION DEL BOSQUE TROPICAL HUMEDO EN EL CARIBE DE COSTA RICA, utilizando la ECOFINCA como Centro de Capacitación y Transferencia de Tecnología.

Ya he enviado muestras de los productos actuales de plantas medicinales con valor agregado (7 infusiones, 2 condimentos a base de hojas de albahaca y orégano y un ungüento de juanilama y saragundí que alivia los dolores musculares y el resfrío) a Taiwan y a Austria (en este país se hizo a través de la empresa ECOPLANT y ellos venderían con su marca). En el caso de Taiwan se hizo a través de una industria de Té y ellos estarían dispuestos de poner nuestra marca (TERRANATURA) y toda la información en chino. Parece que les interesó mucho el ungüento, pero necesito dinero para desarrollar los productos (y para esto no tengo fondos!!!!), si realizo las primeras ventas de ungüento a Taiwan o a Austria, estoy segura que con esto lograríamos cubrir parte de nuestros costos y con las ganancias desarrollar nuevos productos ORGANICOS CON VALOR AGREGADO. El problema es que los negocios no se concretan tan rápido como esperamos, además que es necesario contar con CAPITAL DE TRABAJO PARA SU DESARROLLO. (La idea del producto ya está lista, incluso la marca y la etiqueta), pero aún falta terminar de completar.

Sería muy útil el apoyo que podamos recibir de alguna empresa que simplemente quiera darnos la mano y ESTIMULARNOS A DESARROLLARNOS COMO EMPRESA, con lo cual se cumple la contrapartida que el BID nos ha solicitado. El proyecto que el BID nos financió es por $250.000 para las construcciones del Centro de Capacitación y Transferencia de Tecnología y para la cartera de crédito para desarrollar las microempresas. Además un fondo no reembolsable para que consultores realicen los diferentes estudios que le mencioné por la suma de $105.000. Este proyecto finaliza en el 2005 y para el 2004 deben estar colocados todos los créditos (se han estimado 100 créditos de $1.000 cada uno).

Nuestros productos están en un mercado que cada día crece más, pues son ORGANICOS CERTIFICADOS y le dan valor agregado a las plantas medicinales, así como utiliza los árboles (medicinales, frutales y maderables) para que se conviertan en la pensión de las familias campesinas que están participando en e proyecto. Con las hortalizas que las familias van a sembrar como sus propios huertos, garantizarán la seguridad alimentaria. El excedente lo venderán al mercado de exportación y al mercado nacional. En ambos mercados ya he realizado importantes gestiones y hay opciones muy concretas para comercializar producto fresco a Estados Unidos y en los supermercados de Costa Rica.

Lira - Nov 26, 2003 1:22 pm (#7 Total: 8)
Fundación Solidaridad


El objetivo de la F.S. es apoyar las actividades productivas de mujeres pobres (artesanías y objetivos no industriales) ofreciéndoles todas las asesorías para que produzcan artículos de calidad y precio adecuado. De esta manera la FS les permite el acceso al mercado, la obtención de un ingreso y el tener una mejor calidad de vida.

Pueden ingesar a www.fundacionsolidaridad.cl y ver nuestra gama de productos.

Ferraro - Nov 27, 2003 9:37 am (#8 Total: 8)
Defensores del Chaco

La Fundación Defensores del Chaco es una organización sin fines de lucro que se encuentra ubicada en un barrio del Partido de Moreno, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina.

La organización desarrolla sus funciones en un barrio de aproximadamente 6.500 habitantes, teniendo como misión generar espacios de encuentro entre los distintos actores intervinientes en la comunidad con el fin de recomponer la trama barrial. Es así como se llevan a cabo actividades de promoción deportiva, cultural, artística, educativas, de capacitación y de promoción de la salud.

Desde la organización se articula con organizaciones barriales de la región y se realizan eventos en conjunto denominados: “Aguante la Cultura”. Se trata de encuentros culturales al aire libre, en plazas o espacios públicos donde se instala un escenario para los artistas zonales, una radio, un stand de las organizaciones (donde cada una muestra su trabajo) y se realizan actividades vinculadas con la economía solidaria (se realizan ferias de trueque, venta de artesanías, venta de comida en general por personas del barrio, etc). En dichos eventos, estas actividades permiten generar recursos propios a quienes las llevan a cabo. Este tipo de actividades son organizadas, fomentadas y llevadas a cabo por Defensores del Chaco –las artesanías, productos, etc que se muestran en los aguante son realizados en los talleres de la fundación-.

Por todo esto, podemos decir que Defensores es una organización que se vincula fuertemente al trabajo con chicos y jóvenes desde la educación, capacitación y la generación de ingresos propios. Para poder lograr este trabajo contamos con el apoyo de distintas organizaciones y empresas como ser: Embajada Suiza, Empresa Amanco Argentina, Anna Gancia y equipo, Empresa Nike, Fundación Antorchas, Fundación Ashoka, Fundación Avina, Centro de Información y Educación Para el Desarrollo, Fundación C&A, Fundación Kellogg`s, Fundación MC Donald`s, Proamba, Culebrón Timbal, Fernando Barbera, Fundación LBV, Fundación Octubre, British Council y Streetfootballworld.

Defining the range of activities that can be described as business-social ventures

Kris Herbst - Nov 10, 2003 6:42 pm (#1 Total: 11)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Here is one definition of business/social ventures:

Business/social ventures are initiatives that operate under market-based principles while pursuing social impact. Social entrepreneurs design these ventures under the assumption that achieving scale, and therefore significant social impact, requires leveraging market-based income streams and private sector resources. At their core, business/social ventures build "hybrid value chains" -— production and distribution value chains in which the principles governing businesses and social sector interventions are no longer artificially separated. In order to lead successful business/social ventures, social entrepreneurs must embrace market-based entrepreneurship.

Changemakers.net is inviting you to place your project on a matrix of solutions that recognizes there is a range of business-social ventures, beginning with projects described as "No Fee for Service Yet" – these are projects that have potential to become business-social ventures but have earned less than 10 percent of their operating costs from earned revenues or fees this far. "Mixed" ventures are closer to becoming full-fledged social enterprises, and can emphasize either donor funding, or fees for services if they are closer to being a social enterprise. "Social Enterprises" are defined as projects that generate at least enough revenue to pay for their operating costs. They can be 100% self-sustaining, or even generate a net profit.

This does not suggest that all worthwhile social projects must generate revenues. Some objectives may require donor financing, or may be unduly compromised if they were put into the business-social venture model.

Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn - Nov 13, 2003 12:38 am (#2 Total: 11)
Sohodojo


We vowed that we would do our best to keep our posts short and to the point for this event. And here we are on our second post and it is much longer than we'd like. But please bear with us. We believe there is a point to be made and it will take a bit of explanation and example. Please don't be deterred by the length of this post.

There is an unspoken assumption in the Ashoka/Changemakers Solutions Bank that makes it difficult for us, as social entrepreneurs if we are to be categorized in this regard, to paint ourselves into this picture. This assumption is that the fundamental organizing unit of social change is the organization. Whether characterized as a business-social venture, a project, a non-profit or for-profit corporation, the assumption is still the same. According to the Solution Bank model, organizations are the 'players' in this domain and individual social entrepreneurs are invisible.

For those who 'play the game' according to Big Is Good organizing principles, this is not a problem. From a Big Is Good perspective, my social impact strategy and my organization are one and the same. But this is 'old school' entrepreneurism. Over the last 150 or so years, Industrialization and urbanization have gone hand-in-hand with the rise of the corporate form of organization (regardless of sector distinctions). But as the speed of change accelerates, ownership becomes a liability and we are increasingly seeing the 'deconstruction' of traditional corporations into what Charles Handy has called Shamrock organizations; a three-leaf network of permanent core employees, outsourced service providers (business-to-business relationships), and the contingency (temporary, as-needed) workforce.

What was once done by 'command and control' through monolithic organizations is increasingly done through dynamic business networks. The organizing unit, in other words, is increasingly the business ecosystem rather than the business organization. With this change, the domain of entrepreneurism is shifting from managing an organization to influencing an ecosystem.

So what does this have to do with social entrepreneurism and the Ashoka/Changemakers Solution Bank? Well, this goes to the heart of what the Solution Bank can tell us about the domain of social entrepreneurism. There is a growing community of social entrepreneurial free agents. These are entrepreneurial Individuals who believe that the best way to make his or her most significant social impact is to serve as a change insurgent into many dynamic interrelated organizations rather than affiliating with just one. The Solution Bank can tell us about organizations within the Social Enterprise domain, but it will under-represent this emerging approach to the practice of entrepreneurial social change.

Let us take ourselves for example. We are the co-founders and research directors of Sohodojo, an independent, non-profit, applied research and development laboratory supporting solo entrepreneurs and working families in rural and distressed urban communities seeking sustainable participation in the Network Economy. Sohodojo is a network enabler, serving as the outsourced R&D lab for a new generation of microenterprise and small business networks. But Sohodojo is only a one part of our comprehensive entrepreneurial social change strategy.

We are also entrepreneurial participants in some of the microenterprise networks that Sohodojo seeks to support. For example, we are active in the Chandler Guild, a microenterprise and small business network of soybean wax candlemakers. We helped envision and start the Chandler Guild, but we don't own it or control it. Sohodojo Jim ran for and was elected to the Table of Twelve, the Guild's leadership committee. And he was subsequently elected by the Table as the Business Co-chair to help guide the evolution of the Guild. Here, we exercise influence without authority rather than command and control through ownership.

While we stand to profit from our active peer-based participation in this business, we will not gain a windfall return from having a founding ownership stake in this business. And any software technologies or educational materials that Sohodojo helps to develop to support the Chandler Guild will be published under Open Source and Open Content licenses to be available to any entrepreneurs who want to start and evolve a similar microenterprise or small business network.

In addition to Sohodojo and the Chandler Guild, Timlynn is Director and Jim is Entrepreneur and Futurist In Residence of the North American Rural Futures Institute at Montana State University Northern. In these capacities, we are doing applied field research and social action to add a Small Is Good dimension to the rural futures research domain.

While you might map any one or another of these organizations into the Solution Bank based on its mission and characteristics, you would be missing the forest for the trees. It's not about any one of these organizations. Rather our social change agenda is about the interaction and mutual support of these various organizations and their stakeholders and participants. This is an example of a business-social venture ecosystem. An essential element in this ecosystem is the trusted network of entrepreneurial individuals that bind these organizations together.

We don't yet know how to reconcile this emerging sub-culture within the social entrepreneurial community into the model of the Ashoka/Changemakers Solutions Bank. We welcome insights and suggestions in this regard. We do know what's at stake however. Failure to fully appreciate the re-emergence of the Small Is Good World (the domain of the Power of the Individual rather than the Big Is Good World's power emanating from organizations) can mean that the social enterprise support infrastructure (organizations such as Ashoka, Skoll and Schwab, etc.) will increasingly cater to social change organizations rather than support the social change entrepreneurs from which these organizations and ecosystems evolve.

For additional background on these ideas, please see our article, Cross-Sector Partnerships: New Perspectives in Social Entrepreneurism.

vernhughes - Nov 13, 2003 1:16 am (#3 Total: 11)
Social Entrepreneurs Network


This message from Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn is very useful for the social enterprise community, in that it indicates very clearly one of the things we need to do. And that is, to demonstrate serious business enterprise credentials, rather than remain undifferentiated from New Age fairyland-type agendas. This differentiation task is critically important for our reputation and for our building of a critical mass of viable enterprises.

Vern Hughes

Thomas George - Nov 14, 2003 10:04 am (#4 Total: 11)
Stanford University


Hello, I am Thomas George from Stanford University. I would like to add some points for discussion. While I see why it might be helpful to identify businesses that pursue a social mission as “business-social ventures”, is there a danger of having too many terminologies given that we already have social enterprises, social ventures, and so on? One point that I think we are trying to make is that businesses traditionally have not considered social impact as part of their value propositions. This is what I think the Grameen-Ashoka dialogue has brought into focus. Muhammad Yunus has proved that social impact can be at the core of viable businesses that help the poor escape poverty. An argument could then be made that we can look at all businesses as having some social impact. Jed Emerson’s “blended value” is an eloquent expression of integrating social impact into the value proposition. When a business tries to make wealth by any means, it certainly is going to let a few profit at the expense of the many or at the expense of future generations. Our safeguard against this is a high-functioning transparent marketplace. If so, I would then argue that its absence is a major reason why poverty (and associated problems of malnutrition, disease, illiteracy, and environmental degradation) is such an intractable problem. For example, the majority of the rural poor of the developing world are the farming poor who operate in dysfunctional marketplaces without effective access to knowledge and technologies, capital, and competing markets to make their farming a viable business.

Karin Hillhouse - Nov 14, 2003 10:49 am (#5 Total: 11)
Ashoka - Changemakers.net


Thanks, Thomas, for your well-considered comments. This matter of proliferating terms may only be or become a problem if their various adherents were to get stuck insisting on one or another, and thus potentially deciding too quickly that a "rival" definitional camp couldn't possibly have an approach meriting serious attention.

Your emphasis on a transparent marketplace is so important. Have you seen the fine and recent case that demonstrates how new communications technologies, deployed in a business-social venture, are working in India to help the farming poor you cite vastly improve their knowledge and thus leverage in the marketplace?

E-Choupal and Profitable Rural Transportation: Web-based information and procurement tools for farmers - Kuttayan Annamalai and Sachin Rao, August 2003.

Check it out at
http://www.digitaldividend.org/pdf/echoupal_case.pdf

Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn - Nov 14, 2003 2:55 pm (#6 Total: 11)
Sohodojo


No, not Karl, Groucho. Many of us are familiar with the the quote attributed to Groucho in which he quips, "I wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have me as a member!"

We can't help but think that one of the underlying motivations for folks to add the 'social' adjective to the terms enterprise, entrepreneur, venture, and similar business-related words is that many people have negative opinions about the domain of business and the system of capitalism. It's as if we just add this magic term to a traditional business concept and we suddenly have a club in which we can accept membership. We don't mean to sound cyncial, but there is probably more truth to this than many of us would care to admit.

Personally, we don't think of ourselves as social entrepreneurs, nor of our business/life strategy as a social enterprise or social venture. We are first and foremost competitive entrepreneurs and happy capitalists. Admiting this may well turn some folks off. But the reality is that it is how you behave as an entrepreneur and how you practice capitalism that gives the domain of business a positive or negative value basis. For us, that value basis is measured in whether your life and the organizations you create or join lengthen or shorten the flight of Spaceship Earth during human beings' stewardship at the helm.

Once we learned about and started participating in the Social Enterprise community, we started using this terminology to be understandable to others. But fundamentally, we are businesspeople and capitalists who 'fit in' to a community like Social Edge.

We don't have to get rich to be happy, and we don't like the idea of working hard to make a few rich folks richer because they invested in our business early on. These and similar personal values impact how we behave as businesspeople, and how we envision and implement a business.

Business is business. Corporations are simply 'wrappers' around collaborative networks of people. The people, as agents for the ephemeral entity of the corporation, determine the good or bad works of the legal entity. Big or small, the impact of a corporation is the result of peoples' actions.

For example, we intend the Chandler Guild, a microenterprise and small business network of soybean wax candlemakers, to be both a wildly successful industry competitor and a humane and environmentally-friendly business. How we design and implement this business will determine if it might be viewed as a social-business enterprise. But ultimately, how well this business succeeds in the marketplace will be a function of its competitive strength in the industry.

Our challenge with the Chandler Guild, and the challenge for similar 'social-business ventures', is to figure out how to capitalize on the characteristics of Small Is Good World organizing principles to create a unique competitive advantage in the marketplace. We'll need, for example, to innovate in the creation of "Who, How, and Why" marketplaces rather than trying to sell into the "How Much and Where" marketplaces of price and distribution that are optimized for Big Is Good players.

Once we understand that business is business and capitalism is not a dirty word, then we are starting on the road to creative competition in the Real World.

So, in response to Thomas' original post, since business is a domain of action by and for people, then all business is social by nature and has a social impact. And in response to Karin's point about the flexibility of terminology, we agree. Actions speak louder and truer than words.

Thomas George - Nov 17, 2003 10:36 am (#7 Total: 11)
Stanford University


Thanks Karin. I have no particular objection to the term “business-social venture”, it seems to be a way to highlight the fact that there is a deliberate pursuit of social good. Thanks also to Jim and Timlynn for making the case that business by nature is social and has a social impact. Certainly, the new term does not mean that a regular business by nature is “anti-social”. Also, even a “business-social venture” can potentially deliver less social good, if market conditions for its profit suddenly turn bad.

Elaborating more on poverty-business relationship, if making money in a sustained manner is one way out of poverty, it will likely happen only in a highly functioning, transparent marketplace. Karin, thanks for pointing out e-Choupals of the Indian Tobacco Company, they have a good system. Both farmers and ITC are greatly benefiting from ITC’s direct procurement and product distribution system. One suggestion, however, I have is that I would consider ITC as a player in the marketplace than the marketplace itself.

C Kirabo - Nov 17, 2003 6:22 pm (#8 Total: 11)
Webbed Strategist, Life in Africa Foundation


There is a growing community of social entrepreneurial free agents. These are entrepreneurial Individuals who believe that the best way to make his or her most significant social impact is to serve as a change insurgent into many dynamic interrelated organizations rather than affiliating with just one.

Yes, yes, yes, yes! And this is perhaps why I have a hard time with the whole earned income discussions. I believe earned income strategies have their appropriate place and I also believe in capitalism. AS AN INDIVIDUAL change insurgent, however, I do not need to earn income to be able to sustain what I am naturally driven to do. What sustains me is the potential payout in long-term impact, and really nothing else.

I'm getting ready to upload a whole bunch of stuff to the piecetrain site that I hope you Small is Good folks are going to love - you inspired much of the thinking that led to the final shape and form. You can get a sneak preview of how we're using some interesting techniques to pull global resources for change together for the small world to find them more easily here: http://piecetrain.com/2/7/global/grassroots

Thanks for articulating the plight of the change insurgent so well.

My best,

Christina
Kampala, Uganda
http://piecetrain.com

Elizabeth Kennedy - Nov 20, 2003 5:38 pm (#9 Total: 11)
Consultant


Would a service charging a small amount (by US standards) for music therapy for all kinds of kids, including the developmentally disabled, be considered a business-social venture? Perhaps sometimes it's just substituting for the music classes that used to be held in public schools. But it does seem to benefit about one hundred thousand kids of all descriptions, and at an affordable rate.
  http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/1998/11/23/editorial1.html

Garcia - Nov 25, 2003 4:46 pm (#10 Total: 11)
RASA - Fellow de Ashoka

Every social enterprise should be defined by three different criteria. Efficiency, profitability and transparency. The big thing is how we distribute the utilities among our constituencies and how this affect their lives.

All in all, a successful social venture should include sustainable development models that, when apply to our communities, make a significant changes on people’s lives.

Pellizzari - Nov 25, 2003 5:14 pm (#11 Total: 11)
La Usina - Fellow de Ashoka


I think that we should sell our services when our mission as a non-profit organization is not compromised. This is something very interesting. We don’t have to rush in order to get resources without taking into account that we can transform our organizations into a company. Our mission must be sustained because we are the ones that transform people’s lives. We don’t have to sell “our soul to the devil”. To be honest, we have to be clever, we need to think about selling our services in the market, but we should not forget our mission.

I'm excited about this discussion and can add one point of view on the issue of HIV/AIDS.

The Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS is a network of 130 international companies who have agreed to use their corporate infrastructure, products, etc in the fight against AIDS. Some companies are hard hit by the epidemic (those with operations in Sub-Saharan Africa like Anglo-American, Heineken, Debeers, DaimlerChrysler) but others are getting involved simply because they see it as a fundamental issue of corporate social responsiblity.

So far the most active participants in the coalition have been companies for whom AIDS has become a business issue--Anglo for example has close to 40 percent of their workforce infected. But other companies are starting to get involved in the advocacy side of the work--makign the case to government officials that corporations want them to act.

I'd be curious to hear others thoughts--I see the business community as one of the largets untapped resporuces in the fight against AIDS.

Trevor Neilson Executive Director Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS www.businessfightsaids.org

Pellizzari - Nov 25, 2003 5:05 pm (#1 Total: 4)
La Usina - Fellow de Ashoka


Our institution, La Usina is selling consulting services to non-profit organizations that are currently working with people with disabilities. This is something that gave us the opportunity to generate resources. We also sell training programs for professional and specialists. The most successful course is on “postures for people who use wheelchairs”.

We are exploring the possibility of creating a fair-trade community of people with disabilities in order they can sell their products in the market. At the moment we are doing some research on the available products and analyzing how we can improve their marketing strategies.

Fraga - Nov 25, 2003 6:01 pm (#2 Total: 4)
Centro de Formación Popular "Renaciendo Juntos"


First and foremost we think that the success of our project depends on our ability to use different technologies and knowledge. This knowledge has been inside universities and think-tanks for a long time but never used by communities. This tremendous amount of knowledge can be implemented by non-profit organizations.

At the moment we are managing two projects that generate income for our organization. We have created a cooperative that sells products based on algae (chemical products, food for birds and cattle, tea, and organic vegetables) Thanks to an agreement with a Japanese company we are exploring the possibility of selling algae to fancy restaurants in Japan. On the other hand we are also working on a waste management project where local people recycle waste and generate benefits to rural communities. We have an agreement with the City of Falcon (Venezuela) and other non-profit organizations in order to sell this waste management service to the city. According to public officials only 3 of 43 neighborhoods have this service. At the moment we are looking for loans and private investments to develop this project.

Madden - Nov 25, 2003 8:38 pm (#3 Total: 4)
Fellow Ashoka


This an extraordinary opportunity!! In fact, I am working with more than 300 Ecofrarms that produce organic agriculture and medicines in Costa Rica. The project also contribute to the protection of tropical forests. These organizations also provide training courses other technology related programs.

We have sent our products to be tested in Taiwan and Austria. Thanks a company named ECOPLANT we have started to sell this product in Austria. Taiwan is buying tea and they promised to buy other products in the future using our brand TERRANAUTURA. They are also planning to put all the information about our products in Chinese. They want buy more products but we need loans to start the production. I am pretty sure that if we are able to get some money from investors we will cover our costs, get profits and invest on a new line of organic products. We need people to start working on the production.

It will be very useful if we received some input from corporations about how our organizations could became a social enterprise. This is something that the Interamerican Bank of Development has recommended (IBD). The IBD gave us a loan of $250.000 for a Training Centre and to develop microfinance projects. We are planning to give $1000 to 100 micro-enterprises by 2004.

Fortunately we are selling our products in a booming market. The products are certified and add value to the production chain. Thanks to this market-driven project, rural workers are getting better salaries . We are also working side by side with families in rural communities to sell agricultural products not used for their own consumption. At the moment we are negotiating contracts to begin exporting to the US and to sell in supermarkets and groceries stores across Costa Rica.

Ferraro - Dec 2, 2003 12:12 pm (#4 Total: 4)
Defensores del Chaco


Defensores del Chaco Foundation is a non-profit organization located in the Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina. We work in an area of 6,500 inhabitants and our mission is to re-create community networks within the entire neighborhood. Therefore, we are currently developing cultural activities, educational events, training and sports programs as well as health care initiatives.

Our institution serves many other grassroots organizations in the neighborhood. We have a series of agreements with these organizations and we all organize cultural events. These cultural events named “Aguante la Cultura”, (“Culture is Cool”) give local artists the possibility of expressing their skills while generating income for local communities. Local organizations also promote their work through these events, as well as micro-enterprises. We have found that cultural events are a very important tool that help us generate some income. All the activities and programs are organized by Defensores del Chaco.

It is important to recognized this organizations for their support to our mission; Swiss Embassy, Amanco Argentina, Ana Gancia and Team, Nike, Antorchas Foundation, Ashoka, Avina, Center for Information and Education, C&A Foundation, Kellogg´s Foundation, McDonalds, Proamba, Culebrón Timbal, Fernando Barbera, LBV Foundation, Octubre Foundation, British Council, Streetfootballworld.

Queridos Fellows y Amigos del mundo de habla hispana, los invito a dar impresiones y comentarios sobre este fascinante tema.

Kris Herbst - Nov 12, 2003 12:25 pm (#1 Total: 6)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Bienvenidos!!!! En primer lugar una breve presentación personal. He estado editando y escribiendo y administrando el sitio de Changemkers.net desde su lanzamiento en junio de 1998. En los últimos 5 años he sido un observador de los emprendedores sociales. Me siento muy afortunado de haber podido asistir al Dialogo Ashoka Gremeen, en donde un grupo de emprendedores sociales se reunieron para ver como el Grameen Banck esta trabajando en la gestión de proyectos sociales que generan ganancias. También este evento buscó comenzar una nueva discusión sobre como el sector social puede comenzar a adoptar esta nueva idea para aliviar los terribles efectos de las pobreza a nivel global.


Aquí pongo en la mesa de discusión una serie de preguntas que nos pueden ayudar a pensar:

• ¿Cómo este tipo de emprendimientos que buscan obtener ganancias para las organizaciones sociales pueden acelerar la lucha contra la pobreza y cual es el rol de los emprendedores sociales?
• ¿Cuáles son los valores más importantes que no deben ponerse en juego a la hora de llevar a cabo estos emprendimientos?
• ¿Cómo podemos manejar la transición de organizaciones sociales a organizaciones sociales que generan ganancias?
• ¿Cuáles son las barreras culturales, sociales e institucionales, cómo podemos sobreponerlas?
• ¿Qué tipo de incentivos se necesitan para facilitar la transición de actividades que dependen exclusivamente de donantes a una visión en la cual se tienen en cuenta factores tales como el mercado?

Gaston Wright - Nov 13, 2003 11:34 am (#2 Total: 6)
Ashoka


Creo que una de los puntos mas importantes es tratar de converse que las organizaciones sociales no solo tienen que financiarse a través de las donaciones. Pensar 100% en obtener fondos a través de la buena voluntad de otros nos pone en una situación difícil cuando estos fondos no estan accesibles. Si bien no es facil cambiar nuestro foco de atención hacia emprendimientos que generen ganancias o recursos, debemos al menos "hacer un salto cultural" pensar que el generar recursos propios no atenta contra la misión de una organización. Creo que debemos sobrepasar la dicotomia sector socil vs sector privado.

Kris Herbst - Nov 13, 2003 1:23 pm (#3 Total: 6)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Que bueno!!! Esta discusión ya esta avanzando mucho.

Bienvenida Denise, es excelente tener una mirada desde Irlanda del Norte/República de Irlanda. Tus investigaciones resaltan lo importante que este tema en todo el mundo. Ashoka esta particularmente interesada en tu punto de vista. Es decir en construir un punte entre los emprendedores sociales y los de negocios. Los importante es que los emprendedores de negocios apoyen a crear las condiciones para que el sector social sea exitoso en términos comerciales. Por otra parte, los emprendedores sociales pueden ayudar a los empresarios a crear una idea mas profunda de “beneficio social”. Me gustaría tener mas ideas sobre este tema.

En relación a lo que dijo Toby, (en la discusión en ingles) teniendo en cuenta que tu trabajas en Londres y Jakarta y tienes clientes en Bangladesh, tus preguntas son sumamente interesantes. Déjame que se las envié a otros participantes de este foro. Quizás ellos puedan hacer algunos comentarios que te sean utilice.

Que les parecen estas preguntas:

¿Por que no poner precios fijos a los servicios que se brindan a las comunidades pobres, hasta que las mismas puedan conseguir otros donantes? La otra opción, desarrollada por Aurolab sugiere subsidiar con menores ingresos a través de precios mas caros a los de mayores ingresos.

También podemos pensar en esto;

¿Cómo pueden las empresas aprovechar el conocimiento de los emprendedores sociales? Es decir, que cosas son exclusivas de las empresas y que otras necesitan el apoyo de los emprendedores social.

Mark Swiling, uno de los participantes del Diálogo Grameen-Ashoka sugiere que las empresas con una visión tradicional simplemente morirán. Están mas allá de la redención. ¿Quizás un punto de vista realista? Por otro lado, déjenme presentarles un estudio de caso de un importante corporación internacional que esta desarrollando un proyecto que brinda excelentes alternativas a las comunidades de bajos ingresos. Existe la idea (ver Prahald y otros) de que existen excelentes oportunidades para que las grandes empresas hagan negocios y generen beneficios a los sectores mas pobres.

¿Qué piensan ustedes?

lumerman - Nov 17, 2003 1:55 pm (#4 Total: 6)
Instituto Austral de Salud Mental


Me interesa la oportunidad por que en mi area especifica (las enfermedades mentales mas graves) hemos desarrollado la idea original que dio origen al instituto que dirijo, a un punto de eficiencia con recursos simples que ha sido reconocida nacional e internacionalmente como un modelo innovador en desarrollo constante. La cuestion de la financiacion ha sido un factor historicamente un problema para nuestro emprendimiento.De hecho fue el ingreso al mercado adaptandonos a sus reglas las que nos permitieron no fracasar y mas aun crecer significativamente. Lo que puedo decir es que las enfermedades mentales epidemiologicamente son las mas frecuentes y perniciosas hoy dia en que desde la salud publica es la discapacidad el elemento mas importante a considerar cuando se realizan consideraciones epidemiologicas.De hecho la depresion ocupa el 2do lugar despues de las enfermedades cardio vasculares como las mas destructivas en terminos de discapacidad con lo que esto le implica a la persona que las padecen, sus familias y comunidades en terminos de sufrimiento y costo economico.Esto puede significar, dada la magnitud del problema, en un factor que confronte a los funcionarios de los gobiernos a reconocer el problema y asi no solo invierta mas en salud mental sino reoriente la masa de dinero que se malgasta en servicios psiquiatricos anquilosados y deteriorados.

Albina Ruiz - Nov 26, 2003 8:02 am (#5 Total: 6)
Ciudad Saludable


Los bussiness social venture, pueden ser una herramienta viable para ayudar el proceso de erradicación de la pobreza, porque permite que la gente pobre pueda generar sus propios ingresos. El rol de los emprendedores sociales en esto es hacer que las inversiones estén dirigidas a resolver los problemas mas sentidos de los pobres, empoderándolos y haciéndolos dueños de estas iniciativas de negocios. Generar capacidades para que están iniciativas crezcan y se multipliquen y sobretodo apunten a generar desarrollo económico local, que las ganancias no se vayan fuera sino se orienten a consumir productos producidos en cada área local, dinamizando la economía y a su vez resolviendo los problemas mas sentidos como el de salud, educación, alimentación, tomando en cuenta los aspectos ambientales y culturales.

Al buscar beneficios comerciales debemos mantener los valores de ética, de respeto por las personas, por el ambiente, asegurarnos que las ganancias no van a ir a para de unos pocos sino que ayudara a salir de pobreza a muchos.

Para dar el tránsito de una organización civil dependiente de donaciones a una que genere sus propios recursos creo que debemos mirar el mercado, encontrar los “nichos” sobretodo en las áreas donde tengamos experiencia y potencie o refuerze el trabajo social que desarrollamos.

Lira - Dec 2, 2003 12:38 pm (#6 Total: 6)
Fundación Solidaridad


El objetivo de la F.S. es apoyar las actividades productivas de mujeres pobres (artesanías y objetivos no industriales) ofreciéndoles todas las asesorías para que produzcan artículos de calidad y precio adecuado. De esta manera la FS les permite el acceso al mercado, la obtención de un ingreso y el tener una mejor calidad de vida.

Sin embargo, surgen una serie de tentaciones y problemas.

· Las mujeres más pobres son las más marginadas y no tienen ninguna posibilidad de acceder al mercado... ( nuestro objetivo) PERO... sus productos no son los más bonitos y cuesta venderlos...

· Mujeres sin problemas económicos nos ofrecen un producto TOP para que vendamos en nuestras tiendas y con el margen de ganancia ayudamos a las mujeres pobres...

PERO... sabemos perfectamente que esos productos TOP le quitarán la venta a los otros y solo nosotros tendremos ganancias.

· El verdadero empoderamiento de las mujeres pobres y una mejor calidad de vida para ellas exige una gran inversión de tiempo en conversaciones, cursos, asesorías, lecciones, repeticiones etc... etc.

PERO... ese tiempo invertido en vender nos generaría mucha mayor ganancia.

Etc... Etc...

La opción que hagamos en cada una de estas circunstancias va definiendo nuestro carácter de empresario social o no.

Kris Herbst - Nov 12, 2003 12:23 pm (#1 Total: 5)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Esta es una definición de una organización social que generar ganancias:

Son aquellas organizaciones que operen con una mentalidad de mercado pero que buscan un impacto social. Los emprendedores sociales utilizan estos emprendimientos bajo el supuesto de que lograran mayor escala y por ende mayor impacto. Por ello, buscan obtener ganancias del mercado, a la vez que obtener recursos del sector privado. Estas organizaciones crean “cadenas híbridas del valor”, las nociones de distribución y producción bajo los supuestos sociales no están artificialmente separadas. Con el propósito de poder liderar este tipo de emprendimientos, los emprendedores sociales deben tomar ciertas ideas y conceptos de los emprendimientos que se llevan a cabo en el mercado.

Changemakers.net te invita a que presentes tu proyectos dentro de una “matriz de soluciones” que reconoce la existencia de muchos tipos de emprendimientos de este tipo. Comenzado por proyectos que se describen como “No hay que pagar por servicios todavía”. Estos proyectos tienen el potencial de transformarse en emprendimientos que generan ganancias pero que solo generan el 10% de sus costos operativos. Los emprendimientos compartidos se están convirtiendo en empresas sociales propiamente dichas, lo caul les permite poder obtener recursos a través de donaciones y servicios que prestan. Las empresas sociales se definen como proyectos que generan al menos tantos ingresos como para cubrir sus costos operativos. Pueden ser 100% auto-sustentables o bien generar ganancias.

Esto no quiere decir que todos los proyectos sociales deben generar ganancias. Algunos objetivos requieren de donaciones o pueden hacer peligrara la misión de la organización.

Pellizzari - Nov 18, 2003 8:48 am (#2 Total: 5)
La Usina - Fellow de Ashoka


La venta de servicios, siempre que tengan que ver con la misión de la organización me parece un recurso interesante....creo que hay que analizar muy bien cuando el servicio, no responde en este sentido...pues no tenemos porque convertir a nuestras entidades sin fines de lucro en empresas por el solo hecho de sostenerlas económicamente.... nuestras causas deben ser sostenibles porque transforman la vida de las personas...no solo sustentables desde lo económico....cuidado con vender el alma al diablo, no? Diversificar es lo mejor...pero sin perder la brújula.

Garcia - Nov 24, 2003 9:57 am (#3 Total: 5)
RASA - Fellow de Ashoka


Toda empresa social tiene que contener como ingredientes de su funcionalidad los criterios de eficiencia, rentabilidad, transparencia y generación de utilidades. La cuestión es el cómo se redistribuye la ganancia a los asociados y cómo ésta repercute en el cambio de sus condiciones de vida.

Por lo tanto, una organización social que genera ganancias pero que tiene un impacto social es aquella que se plantea desde sus orígenes el establecimiento de modelos de desarrollo autogestivos y sustentables que permitan el cambio paulatino de las condiciones de vida de sus asociados.

Lira - Nov 26, 2003 1:20 pm (#4 Total: 5)
Fundación Solidaridad


En primer lugar la organización debe tener como principal objetivo de su Misión el dar respuesta a algún problema o carencia social y que esta respuesta sea eficiente y eficaz.

El hecho que para lograr este objetivo busque formas de financiar la intervención vía generación de ganancias, es un medio, no un objetivo.

Para mí ésta es la gran diferencia con un empresario que obtiene utilidades de un negocio y luego hace donaciones para objetivos sociales. El objetivo principal en este caso es el negocio.

En nuestro caso, hemos vivido muy nítidamente esta diferenciación porque es parte de una tensión permanente en nuestro trabajo, que nos obliga día a día a volver a optar por nuestra misión.

Paco Arroyo - Dec 2, 2003 5:00 pm (#5 Total: 5)
CEDICAR A.C.


En la ciudad de México emprendimos la lombricultura como una actividad que esperábamos rentable para la organización (ONG). La experiencia fue que los grandes productores tienen precios muy bajos por su gran escala. Se logró cubrir el 100% de los gastos operativos pero no había más excedentes para solventar el trabajo invertido de manera justa y digna. Entonces no nos libramos del subsidio por otras fuentes, el cual, cuando terminó su ciclo e intentamos sostener la actividad sin los recursos de subsidio, lastimosamente el proyectó vino abajo. Existían quizás más alternativas, pero la falta de tiempo y trabajo voluntario no pudieron sumarse después de haber gozado de subssidios. El fondo revolvente inicial funcionó durante 4 años sin subsidio, y a los ojos de otros intentos, no fue tan mal. Ahora se vuelve a empezar tomando las lecciones aprendidas y esquemas más centrados en la autoproducción, el reciclaje local y la autonomía como valores prioritarios a la lógica del mercado.

Saludos a todos: Francisco (Paco) Arroyo.

Kris Herbst - Nov 13, 2003 3:51 pm (#1 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


The Hard Numbers on Social Investments
HBS Working Knowledge
November 10, 2003

The field of social-purpose investing is growing and becoming more sophisticated. Should investors expect lower returns to benefit society? A new Harvard Business School study examines the question. In what is believed to be the largest study of its kind, MBA students at Harvard Business School recently analyzed the financial returns generated by 110 early-stage companies backed by Investors' Circle, a national network dedicated to early-stage investments in companies that "deliver commercial solutions to social and environmental problems."

Kris Herbst - Nov 13, 2003 3:53 pm (#2 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


The Double Bottom Line Private Equity Landscape in 2002/2003

This report captures for the first time the landscape of early-stage social venture investing in the US. Based on findings from a RISE survey conducted from October 2002 through January 2003, the report describes the state of equity investment in early stage social ventures.

Kris Herbst - Nov 13, 2003 3:59 pm (#3 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


The Blended Value Proposition, by Jed Emerson

Blended Value Proposition states that all organizations, whether for-profit or not, create value that consists of economic, social and environmental value components. Certain investors and organizations are intentionally attempting to create and maximize the impact of this value. The key areas in which both investors and organizations are working to maximize this blended value are:

Corporate Social Responsibility

Social Enterprise

Social Investing

Strategic/Effective Philanthropy, and

Sustainable Development.

The Blended Value Map presents an overview of each of these “silos” of activity and within each area outlines key

Actors,

Web Resources,

Books, Articles and Papers

The Map also presents a discussion of what key challenges and issues people within each silo are working to address.

In addition, the Map also presents a number of cross-cutting issues that actors in each silo are working with in common. These issues include:

Capital Questions

Performance Metrics

Leadership and Organizational Development

Public Policy, Tax and Regulatory Questions

The Map also presents ideas about how we could work to organize an international effort to better connect the efforts of those in each of the silos in order to make sure that insights developed in one silo have the best opportunity to influence and inform the work taking place in another silo.

"A new world order, Jed Emerson's capitalist utopia. Can social value reward investors, companies?" Money Magazine.

Kris Herbst - Nov 13, 2003 4:03 pm (#4 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Pursuing Profit and Social Development Together

By building "hybrid value-chains" where for-profit and social impact goals are mutually supporting, businesses can create new markets and serve millions of low-income consumers.

Kris Herbst - Nov 13, 2003 4:21 pm (#5 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Funding Them to Fish

Report on a two-day conference held by the Social Enterprise Alliance in May 2003 designed to create conversation among funders interested in making investments that lead toward nonprofit financial sustainability. It was the first event of its kind, focusing specifically on the strategy of supporting nonprofit earned income activities as an important and effective strategy in the overall goal of helping nonprofits become more financially sustainable.

Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn - Nov 14, 2003 1:15 pm (#6 Total: 10)
Sohodojo


Kris, thanks for these pointers to such interesting and relevant articles. We'd like to balance these excellent domain-specific recommendations with a few titles that are tangentially related to our mutual interests. Here are four books that we have found incredibly inspirational and insightful in evolving our social change vision and strategies...

Daniel Quinn's Beyond Civilization: Humanity's Next Great Adventure is a slim, non-fiction volume that pulls together Quinn's provocative ideas about history, human nature, and our future. This book rounds up the inspirational ideas sprinkled throughout Ishmael, The Story of B, and My Ishmael, and annotates them in a conversational question-and-answer style that is most enjoyable reading.

Foremost among Quinn's Big Ideas that have shaped our thinking at Sohodojo are:

There is no One Right Way: Tolerance of diversity is one of Gaia's survival strategies, not a moral value.

Any social change strategy that requires individuals or corporations to become more saintly or to sacrifice in the name of simplicity or the Common Good is doomed to failure.

The first point is reflected in Sohodojo's acceptance and celebration of the pertetual Yin-Yang relationship between the Big Is Good World and the Small Is Good World. Neither is right nor wrong, just qualitatively different. We need to learn how to balance these two aspects of the human condition rather than manically swinging from one to the other.

That second point may sound cynical or arrogant, but it is neither. The lesson to be learned by social entrepreneurs from Quinn's provocation is to 'Just Do It!' – your social change strategy had better be competitive in the dog-eat-dog world of a free marketplace which is subject to intentional manipulation through scientific marketing. If your strategy relies on re-educating consumers or appealing to the 'enlightened few', don't plan on changing the world. Yes, you might have an impact, maybe even a significant impact by social sector standards, but you won't change the world on a planetary scale that will substantially lengthen the flight of Spaceship Earth.

Linked: The New Science of Networks by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi is a must read source of insights that will help shape your social enterprise strategies and tactics. This is a wide-ranging and very readable overview of the application of the Big Ideas in network theory. Most of us are increasingly familiar with the Six Degrees, Strength of Weak Ties, Rich Get Richer dynamics of social network theory. Familiarity is one thing, true understanding is another. Barabasi's book will give you a crash course in social network dynamics that are essential to social change strategic thinking in our network society and network economy.

There is no book that makes a better case for the re-emergence of the Small Is Good World than Shoshana Zuboff and James Maxmin's The Support Economy: Why Corporations Are Failing Individuals and the Next Episode of Capitalism. Smart executives and marketers from the Big Is Good World are devouring this book to help formulate their next generation of product and service offerings. If you don't read and re-read this book to imprint its content into your strategic thinking, well, prepare to move to the back of the bus.

We finish our short list of recommended readings with a more practical and less Big Picture title that should be on everyone's bookshelf. Walk, don't run to your favorite bookseller and pick up a copy of Influence Without Authority by Allan Cohen and David Bradford. While written in the eighties, it remains in print and is even more relevant in today's world than when it was written.

In a prior post about defining business-social ventures, we made the point that the domain of entrepreneurism is shifting from managing an organization to influencing a business network ecosystem. Cohen and Bradford's book is the definitive guide to the strategy and tactics for survival in this growing domain where thought leadership, not command and control, rule.

We were so impressed and influenced by this book that we wrote an impassioned e-mail to Allan Cohen, distinguished professor at Babson College, and convinced him that Small Is Good World entrepreneurism is an emerging new face in the practice of entrepreneurship. Through subsequent communication we developed a mutual admiration. We're pleased to be able to say that Allan Cohen is now a much-appreciated member of the Sohodojo Advisory Board.

While we are all swamped with domain-specific reading and endless demands on our time to move our social action agendas forward, we do not hesitate to recommend that you find time to add any or all of these books to your reading list.

Kris Herbst - Nov 14, 2003 2:14 pm (#7 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Thank you Jim and Timlynn for this feast for the mind. It's fascinating to see how you blend Small Is Good and the notion that social change strategy had better be competitive in the dog-eat-dog world of a free marketplace!

Kris Herbst - Nov 14, 2003 2:25 pm (#8 Total: 10)
Ashoka / Changemakers


The Social Enterprise Alliance (together with Community Wealth Ventures) has assembled a Directory of Social Enterprises – nonprofit organizations with business ventures and strategic alliances as a reference tool to help build a broad network of social enterprise practitioners around the country.

Jed Emerson - Dec 2, 2003 4:13 pm (#9 Total: 10)
Senior Fellow, Generation Foundation (London)


First off, these are some great sources!! Thanks to Kris and everyond else on this discussion...

Another good source of reading material is both the "Publications" and "Other Publications" pages found at www.redf.org . Specifically, the Practitioner Perspectives writings give a really good perspective from, uh, practitioners ( ! ) that I think is great for folks trying to get a handle on what it's like on the operational side of the table...

best to all! jed

Karin Hillhouse - Dec 3, 2003 8:15 am (#10 Total: 10)
Ashoka - Changemakers.net


Thanks, Jed, for directing us to redf.org resources! I hadn't visited the site for a long time, and I'm pleased to rediscover this gold mine of excellent material.

On the practitioner subject...David Bornstein's new book from Oxford University Press, How to Change the World - Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas masterfully presents the story of innovation and business that is the foundation for positive social change going on around the world, and challenging conventional wisdom about "business" and "social work." The individuals he profiles are teachers, social workers, journalists, doctors, lawyers, and engineers...and each one tells a practitioner's tale of ingenuity and enterprise.

Here's a link to a description of the book:
http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Sociology/SocialMovementSocialChange/?view=usa&ci=0195138058

Thanks again,
Karin

There is a problem in our culture, maybe in all cultures, who give the answer of Cain when asked “where is your brother”. Why ask me, he said, “I am not my brother’s keeper”. To my mind we are all one another’s keeper. We depend on others to provide our food, safety, medicine, and the like. And others depend on us. So we trade within a vast social contract where we scratch one another’s backs. But what of those who have nothing to trade? Caring for them comes by a sacrifice from us. And therein lies the question: Are we willing to sacrifice something to care for others who have nothing to give us in return? Some see no reason to. Others think it’s the right thing to do. But often when it’s done the good sought is diminished by self-interest. For example, while one may not obtain any benefit *from* the poor by helping the poor, benefits may derived nonetheless (e.g. payment from third parties, personal recognition, etc.). The result is diminished because the purpose is not just to do good but also to gain something or avoid a loss. The world is like a giant balance sheet. What time, effort, money, etc. that is spent must come from somewhere. After it’s spent, there is less remaining. Whatever collateral benefit we seek to gain or loss we seek to avoid amounts to an effort to spend on one side of the balance sheet without losing on the other side. The result is we spend less and we spend it less effectively. If we really want to change the world, we must be willing to spend ourselves; to sacrifice what is ours for the good of others seeking nothing in return. Indeed, those who *have* changed the world have done no less. What distinguishes a Martin Luther King from a Jesse Jackson is the willingness to sacrifice. King predicted his death but was undeterred and gave his life. He changed the world. Jackson aggrandized himself, accumulated power, and accomplished far less (some would say his contribution is negative). So . . . for my small part, I try to spend myself for the poor and set an example for normal people that any of us can, and all of us should, sacrifice something of our own for the good of the poor expecting nothing in return. Anyone can do it.

Susan Davis - Nov 16, 2003 8:08 pm (#1 Total: 4)


Dear Scott,

Being from the US as well, I am tempted to agree with you. Certainly you challenge our thinking. But I think your point about sacrifice is interesting. Some would argue that that it's not really a sacrific. We in fact gain by giving ourselves in service.

Yunus could probably be a billionaire if he pursued making money for his own gain. Instead, he uses his considerable talents and energy to build enterprises and self-sustaining institutions that help the poorest make money.

Tell us more about what you have done. What is CFWshops and how have you tried to 'spend yourself for the poor?'

Susan Davis

Keely Stevenson - Dec 2, 2003 12:41 am (#2 Total: 4)
Royal Bafokeng Economic Board


Hi Scott & Susan,
You both make such interesting points. In service to our communities are we REALLY looking beyond self interest or do we in fact gain as Susan says? Your comments made me think that you two would like one of the "Thought Leaders on The Edge" articles here on Social Edge by Reinhild Niebuhr who advocates the philosophy of mutualism for shaping social and economic systems. Called "Ubuntu" in Africa, mutualism draws upon community relationships and finds strength in the goodness of humankind.

Click Here to Read the article: http://www.socialedge.org/?293@@.1adab797

force3 - Dec 4, 2003 8:00 pm (#3 Total: 4)
force3 ( forum for Creative entrepreneurship)


Behind every extra-ordinary man there are so many nameless faceless ordinary souls who make extra-ordinary difference...

Bridwell - Jan 4, 2004 1:29 am (#4 Total: 4)


Naturally, your statements come down to philosophies. Certainly we can do things because it is the "right thing to do," exactly the philosophy I enetered the social services field in thinking. I also believe in the philosophy that Susan Davis says in that "we gain from giving ourselves in service." Let's face it, we are self-interested. I came into this field thinking that money didn't matter, but the reality is that it does. It matters to ensure that my organization can continue its endeavors, that my wife can be educated, that my children can be taken care of. Although I am attracted to work that involves assisting people in making their lives better, I also seek that my life is better for doing so. I believe in what I do for a living, but I also would not do it if I didn't reap substantial benefits for doing so in the way of gratification, money and security. Martin Luther King certainly was a great man, but he also received gratification in being looked up to and seen as a leader in his community. I remain unconvinced that people "sacrifice something of their own for the good of the poor expecting nothing in return." I believe that we do get something in return, otherwise we wouldn't do it. I disagree with the part of your philosophy that states some have "nothing to give in return." I think we all have something to give in return, just not to everybody, all the time. I do agree with the part of your philosophy that alludes to interdependency. We all do in fact rely on each other, which is why it seems so unreasonable to believe that anyone has truly "nothing to give in return."

Let's examine how corporate and non-profit partnerships can benefit both the not-for-profit and the corporate goals. Let's talk about how marketing a social message can change an image and positively affect civil society at the same time.

Let’s start with the Media and how it can effect change for both partners and the people they both serve.

Kris Herbst - Nov 11, 2003 9:41 am (#1 Total: 12)
Ashoka / Changemakers


Welcome Allen! You've opened a good topic here. What are your views? How has Search for Common Ground partnered with business? Has this produced a win for both your organization and your partners? Do you see ways for Search for Common Ground to go beyond partnering with businesses and to move toward creating its own ventures that generate value to support its objectives?

You must have a fascinating story to tell about how your organization has grown to have 360 staff members in 14 countries who view themselves as social entrepreneurs, working with and through the media.

What role do you see media playing in marketing messages that encourage support for business-social ventures? It seems to me that this is a relatively unknown concept, and that people's awareness of the negative impacts of profit-driven businesses on society makes many people in the social sector leery of anything that sounds like business or a market orientation.

llkraemer - Nov 11, 2003 12:42 pm (#2 Total: 12)


There are some excellent examples of companies working for the social good in most recent issue of the McKinsey Quarterly. "How Businesses Can Combat Global Disease" is authored by Rajat Gupta and Lynn Taliento. One examples cited is "the Central American Handwashing Initiative (1996–99), several global companies—including Colgate-Palmolive and Unilever—helped nonprofits such as CARE, as well as government health ministries, to develop, market, and distribute soaps as part of a public-hygiene campaign. In addition to contributing marketing expertise for its advertising strategy, these companies incorporated its key messages into the promotional materials for their products. The result: in Guatemala alone, 300,000 fewer cases of diarrhea annually among children by the end of a year."

Nestle in Brazil and Tata Iron & Steel in India have AIDS awareness campaigns.

It would be interesting to get the opinion of the group - are these real partnerships for social change and good?

This is my only link to the article at this point - I am working on getting one that will work for everyone and will edit later. In the mean time, you may have to sign up for the Quarterly to use this link, but the registration is free.

http://premium.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_page.aspx?ar=1368&L2=33&L3=0

abrarysae@hotmail.com - Nov 16, 2003 9:37 am (#3 Total: 12)
Youth Sciences Association for Environment (YSAE)


I am abrar form Pakistan I am President of Youth Sciences Association for Environment (YSAE) Hyderabad.Our association workin in environmental awareness,socialIssues,Education,and Health Problems and womens litracy programme and Recycling of Poly bags in our region I am offer to you this Polythine bags project in your area.

llkraemer - Nov 24, 2003 5:04 pm (#4 Total: 12)


Here's a new link to the McKinsey article I cited below. If you were interested in the article called "How Businesses Can Combat Global Disease" and couldn't open it - try this link
Cheers,
Linda

http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_abstract.asp?ar=1368&L2=33&L3=94

Garcia - Nov 25, 2003 4:55 pm (#5 Total: 12)
RASA - Fellow de Ashoka


We have to find out companies with a social responsibility philosophy, and with them think about the possibility of generating more strategic partnerships. I think that one of the problems that we could face is how we articulate our interest with their goals. I mean, how we can understand the idea of supply and demand. However, now more than ever, and thanks to all we have learnt in the Ashoka-Greameen Dialogue we have to commit ourselves to work with the business sector. If we built strategic alliances with corporations and other private sector institutions we will be see changes faster.

Pellizzari - Nov 25, 2003 5:36 pm (#6 Total: 12)
La Usina - Fellow de Ashoka


I think that this question also rises another issue. How companies can be partners of non-profit organizations? I see an extraordinary opportunity to share our work and look for solutions to social problems.

Corporations have valuable citizens with different skills in what I call “key issues”. Non-profit organizations tend to have a shortage of human resources in terms of communication, marketing, logistics and management. This is an excellent opportunity to use this resources by creating strategic partnerships with corporations. They also have a network of services providers who can give us better prices, as well as buildings and office spaces that they never use.

We can help them to access communities easily, as well as humanizing their activities. We know some realities that corporations usually ignored and we also have prestige. Another important strategy is to try to work with their human resources department to recruit volunteers for our activities. It is important that our message stress the idea that it is always profitable to work with non-profit organizations. This is something that will generate wealth for everybody.

Lira - Dec 2, 2003 12:33 pm (#7 Total: 12)
Fundación Solidaridad


Thanks to the quality of our products, big and mid-size companies are buying our products as Christmas presents for their employees. Some companies are also buying articles as corporate presents, as well as marketing materials.

In terms of how we marketing our organization, the bank where we have our accounts give us the possibility of showing our products and work in their branches.

The Chilean Wine Association has offered us to have a stand for their annual conference. In return, we have to provide them with ten high-value products for VIP guests.

Deloitte & Touch offers legal counseling to women.

However, I think that the notion of social responsibility is not being used properly. For some people it is only a marketing strategy, for others is a way of creating strong partnerships between the social and business sector.

I would love to have some comments regarding this issue.

Bridwell - Jan 4, 2004 12:49 am (#8 Total: 12)


Another valuable component in social entrapaneurship is the hybrid form that strays from the traditional approaches of corporate philanthropy which gives $$ to causes in an effort to increase its own bottom line and the socially responsible company that operates for-profit ventures in order to benefit a social mission. The hybrid is really a for-profit structure that sacrifices profit for social gain, such as 50/50 partnerships in which for-profit entities release 50% of annual profits to non-profit partners in an effort to sustain the non-profit. Naturally this is not entirely altruistic in that the for-profit simply makes $$ by increasing volume of sale while the non-profit usually creates some level of sustainable demand. For example, a non-profit serves homeless individuals by helping them to obtain employment and resolve legal histories which enables them to maintain rental payments to an affordable landlord. The landlord has a new demand for housing (those that were not previously housed) and thus reaps profit on an untapped resource. The more the non-profit can serve, the more the landlord can sell and thus it makes sense for the landlord to sacrifice profit for the benefit of social gain. Now two factors work together, human need as driven by the non-profit and profit as driven by the for-profit, both of which promote further development. It's a true win-win.

trevorneilson - Jan 5, 2004 6:06 am (#9 Total: 12)
Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS


Our business model is based on this premise, and as a non-profit we have been able to involve 130 companies as members in our organization by focusing on the economic impact of AIDS on their companies. This case can be made with the best examples coming from companies in Africa who have up to 30 percent of their workforce infected. This impacts productivity, absenteeism, morale, etc. By positioning AIDS as a core business issue we work to deconstruct the notion that their involvement is purely philanthropicbecause if their involvement is purely philanthropic by nature it will always be very limited in scope. More information is available at www.businessfightsaids.org.

jimfruchterman - Jan 8, 2004 1:30 pm (#10 Total: 12)
Benetech


We've had very good experiences with gaining in-kind support from technology companies. Over our nearly 15 years in Silicon Valley, we've received more than a million dollars of chips from Intel, concessionary software licenses to speech output software from IBM, map databases from Sony, scanners from HP and Panasonic, etc. One of the good things about many technology products is that they have good margins, and companies can do more if they have the margins. Intellectual property based products have the most flexibility: those whose prices are not determined by manufacturing costs as much as by market pricing. Witness drugs for HIV/AIDS!

rolds - Jan 16, 2004 6:03 pm (#11 Total: 12)
Agri-Aqua Info Mgt & Mktg Dev Corporation


There are many businessmen who or business organizations which do not include social services in the business agenda. By inclusion of social services, however, in the operation is beneficial to both: the business and the people being served. In our place, Butuan City, Philippines, I am presently a part of three (3) business corporations in which social services is infused in the enterprise for nothing can gladly imagined gaining profit but leaving the community in dire poor. The mission is as simple as "A HELPING HAND" but its effect is a handful benefit.

Roldan L. Torralba Lawyer 045 Villanueva Extension Butuan City 8600 Philippines Tel. No. 63-85-3425075 Fax No. 63-085-2255565 E-mail ad: rotorra@skyinet.net / rolds02@yahoo.com

rolds - Jan 17, 2004 6:26 pm (#12 Total: 12)
Agri-Aqua Info Mgt & Mktg Dev Corporation


Dear Abrar,

I am glad to read your message because I, even a lawyer by profession, has initiated a project on Zero Waste. One of the headaches is how to recycle poly bags. With your information, I am therefore asking your goodself to share us the poly bag project.

I will appreaciate it much if you can send it immediately to rolds02@yahoo.com and rotorra@skyinet.net

My profound thanks in advance.

Roldan L. Torralba Butuan City 8600 Philippines Tel. No. 63-85-3425075 Fax No. 63-085-2255565

Pellizzari - Nov 18, 2003 8:51 am (#1 Total: 4)
La Usina - Fellow de Ashoka


Supongo que quisiste decir empresas aliadas de ONG´s?...en este sentido...veo una gran oportunidad de trabajar juntos por el bien común....es decir por el bien de TODOS (los humanos que habitamos el planeta)

Las empresas tienen personas, valiosos ciudadanos con habilidades en temas claves, como comunicación , marketing, logística, procesos, tablero de comando....en fin....muchos temas que les son un poco áridos a las ONG´s....tienen además llegada a una red de proveedores que garantizan mejores precios a la hora de comprar insumos o contratar servicios, tienen dinero, tienen tecnología, instalaciones ociosas que seria muy bueno compartir.

Nosotros podemos humanizar sus actividades, darles espacios de llegada directa a la comunidad, somos conocedores de una realidad que muchas empresas desconocen, tenemos prestigio construido con años de trabajo en ella, podemos generar pertenencia entre sus recursos humanos a través de aliarlos a nuestra tarea, en fin....podemos ayudarlos a descubrir que invertir en el trabajo de las organizaciones sociales, SIEMPRE ES RENTABLE, además de productor de riqueza económica, es productor de riqueza social, de dignidad, de valores, de redes, de sustentabilidad...de la comunidad en la que TODOS QUEREMOS VIVIR PLENAMENTE.

Garcia - Nov 24, 2003 9:59 am (#2 Total: 4)
RASA - Fellow de Ashoka


De entrada, tenemos que encontrar empresas con ética social y junto con ellas trazar las alianzas estratégicas. El primer problema es cómo lograr articular intereses comunes (Vs Oferta-demanda) y prepararse como organización civil para cumplir los compromisos requeridos. Sin embargo, ahora más que nunca y a la luz de los logros y aprendizajes del Diálogo de Bangladesh, tenemos que aspirar a generar alianzas sociales y de negocios entre organizaciones civiles; considero que para la actual coyuntura, este tipo de alianzas permitirán generar cambios más rápidos.

Lira - Nov 26, 2003 1:25 pm (#3 Total: 4)
Fundación Solidaridad


Nosotros nos estamos vinculando de las siguientes maneras:

. Grandes y medianas empresas nos compran para la Navidad los regalos para sus trabajadores y/o sus hijos.

. Empresas nos compran sus regalos corporativos o sus artículos publicitarios.

. El Banco donde manejamos nuestras cuentas nos hace publicidad de las Tiendas a cambio de publicitar ellos el servicio que le prestan a la FS.

. Deloitte & Touch nos ofrece su departamento jurídico para atender gratuitamente consultas de las mujeres dentro de su acción de Responsabilidad social de la Empresa.

.Acción Empresarial – Chile (BSR – USA) nos invita a su Feria anual.

.La Asociación de Viñateros de Chile nos invita a poner un stand en su congreso a cambio de entregarle 10 regalos para sus visitas importantes.

El concepto de Responsabilidad Social Empresarial, a mi modo de ver está siendo mal usado como solo estrategia de marketing por algunos, y comprendido y asumido por otros con los cuales se pueden hacer excelentes alianzas.

Eugenio - Mar 3, 2004 9:03 pm (#4 Total: 4)


Hola mi nombre es Eugenio, trabajo en una empresa de distribución eléctrica, la cual todos los años pierde alrededor de USD2 millones porque los clientes no pagan su deuda. Esta problematica es originada, primero a que el servicio era antes público y ahora es privado y a que se le acostumbro a las personas de a un área especifica del país, a que si no pagaban, igualmente no se los podía cortar el suministro de energía, ya que son areas de pobreza.

Que tal les parece incentivar a la gente a pague y que el hecho de paguen su cuenta, redundará en obras de caracter social, tales como establecimiento de centros de internet, aulas para aprender computadoras, talleres de aprendizajes de trabajos técnicos, canchas de baloncesto, cuadros de beisbol, etc.

Esto podría ser a traves de una Fundación o un ONG, de la cual la empresa sea su principal accionista, el estado otra accionista y la comunidad sería el otro accionista.

¿Porque la comunidad accionista? Estas son áreas de alta delicuencia y desempleo. Entonces los talleres, se podrían realizar trabajos de ebanistería, carpintería, electronica, que podrían representar ingresos para la Fundación y a la vez las personas que trabajen en los talleres serían en primera instancia estudiantes y despues trabajadores, hasta cierto tiempo, ya que la idea es que formen su propio negocio.

Esta una idea que esta dando vueltas en la cabeza, el asunto es que por otra parte, me gustaría plantearlo como un negocio mío, porque no sé si a la empresa le guste la idea, pero a mi parece genial, aunque bastante dificil cambiarle la actitud y costumbre a las personas.

Que les parece espero su comentarios. ¿como hago para ser un Fellows?

Saludos