Scale

If a strategy or program is successful in one place, more of the same elsewhere will be even better.

“Because we’re interested in doing good while doing well, doing even better by doing even more may not just be a powerful challenge, but also a significant way to reduce the ills and sufferings of the world around us,” writes Charles Cameron, host for this event.



Last July, Jacqueline Novogratz, CEO of the Acumen Fund, hosted a workshop on Scale and Replicability.

This wasn’t the only time we’ve looked at issues of scale here on the Edge – the subject keeps recurring. You may want to visit Willy Foote’s event on Geographic Expansion or Bonnie Koenig’s on Going Global.

Jacqueline Novogratz quoted the 5 R’s of scaling up from Rick Dees et al., Scaling Social Impact [Stanford Social Innovation Review, Spring 2004.]

Readiness Is the innovation ready to be spread?

Receptivity Will the innovation be well-received in the target communities?

Resources What resources are required to get the job done right?

Risk What are the chances that things don’t turn out as expected?

Returns What is the bottom line in terms of quality and quantity of impact?

Those are five important questions, and I hope we’ll take advantage of this event to revisit them.

Some points we may want to pursue from the earlier event:

Picking up on Rick Dees’ fourth “R”, Cgasca noted, “It is important to understand that best practices or models are not always transferable to other cultural contexts.”

Probing a bit further, Peter Reese raised what seems to me the fundamental question: “Is the focus of multiplication on using similar methods in other settings or on achieving comparable results?

Along similar lines, Mitra distinguished between scaling up innovative ideas, and organizations. He commented that if your idea is sufficiently better than the ideas your competitors are proposing, they may become your local affiliates rather than your competition.

And Stefanski pointed out that if achieving the greatest social return while remaining sustainable is optimal, “it may be more practical for the entrepreneur to simply offer their knowledge and for future entrepreneurs facing similar challenges to find and apply the knowledge to their unique conditions.”

Each of these points probes the overall idea: they reflect some of the subtleties we should consider when thinking about the power of scaling up to multiply the good.

What’s your experience?

[Note: This is the first of two consecutive events focused on scale: the second, starting next week, will address what we might think of as the opposite imperative -- EF Schumacher’s idea that small is beautiful.]

Patrick O'Heffernan - Apr 11, 2006 3:47 pm (#1 Total: 25)


I recently talked with a NPO leader who started a very successful local program that addresses a national problem. When I asked about national plans, she said she would not expand to a national program because the program would lose its personal contact which is what makes it work. I suggested a franchise and she agreed but neither of us could think of any NPO franchise examples. Do you know of any?

nxtrev - Apr 11, 2006 9:31 pm (#2 Total: 25)


Would you consider reviewing a Christian outreach org. called Christian Business Men's Committee (CBMC)?

If so, consider - the org. first finds a man ready to take on the task of leading - this leader then works in his area to develop a leadership team (the committee) - The committee - made up of about 6-12 people with like minded attitude towards the outreach begin small and grow thier own 'franchise' as they see fit. They take on resp. for finances and work while following bluprint of the Org. james luther nxtrev.org

JColborn - Apr 12, 2006 7:40 am (#3 Total: 25)
The Ford Foundation

Some great thinking on this topic has been done by Kirsten Moi and Greg Ratliff at the Aspen Institute. See http://www.aspeninstitute.org/site/c.huLWJeMRKpH/b.613655/k.70FA/Scale_and_Sustainability.htm for more info, papers, etc...

At Ford, we've done some thinking about scaled impact (not necessarily through social enterprise approaches). A publication that reviews some of our thinking appears at http://www.fordfound.org/publications/recent_articles/docs/asset_pathways.pdf.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 12, 2006 10:06 am (#4 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi, Patrick:

she said she would not expand to a national program because the program would lose its personal contact which is what makes it work

That's a response that, I must say, absolutely delights me. It is just so easy for quantity to be mistaken for quality, and the desire to expand (shorn of any details as to what is expanding, why, or with what impact on other organisms) is one of the great human drivers, invaluable at times but also prone to catastrophic failure!

I personally don’t know of any NPO franchises, and a quick google brought me to a similar discussion at Omidyar where nobody mentioned any – but the idea of franchising tools was mentioned, along with a link to NGO-in-a-box:

NGO-in-a-box is a physical box of CDs consisting of a complimentary set of peer-reviewed and selected Free and Open Source Software (F/OSS) solutions tailored to the needs of not-for-profit, non-governmental organisations (NGOs). In order to keep the product current and adapt to changing and regional user needs, the Tactical Technology Collective recommends establishing "a community of regional point people" to review use and make recommendations on how to adapt the box to suit the needs of their users.

I suspect that franchising may be a concept that’s better suited to the "regular business" world than to the world of entrepreneurs, let alone social entrepreneurs – the entrepreneurial spirit may prefer to see its own solutions out of its own juices, rather than working solutions out of a package, I suspect. Franchising may be appropriate where there's a brand of service or product to be franchised, but cooperation and cooptation may be the equivalent strategies where the objective is simply getting the job done, and brand doesn't significantly add value…

Putting that another way, I suspect franchising as a term focuses on the organizational level, and that memetic seeding (ie the spreading of approaches and tools) may be the method by which the social entrepreneurial sector "scales up" organically…

Organizational scaling up is another matter altogether, in my view, because while it requires the development of leadership across an increasingly distributed organization, it doesn’t demand the same fierce level of individuality that originating a concept, approach and / or organization does.

I guess what I'm saying is that bottom up, a given successful approach can be scaled by others borrowing its concepts and implementing them in their own arenas -- while deliberate expansion of a success story from one arena to many is liable to be a top down phenomenon.

Entrepreneurs in general, perhaps, and social entrepreneurs in particular, are likely to be less focused on the organization (brand, continuity of org) and more on the process (insights, outcomes)…

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 12, 2006 10:36 am (#5 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi James:

And welcome to SocialEdge.

You write of the Christian Business Men's Committee (CBMC):

the org. first finds a man ready to take on the task of leading - this leader then works in his area to develop a leadership team (the committee) - The committee - made up of about 6-12 people with like minded attitude towards the outreach begin small and grow thier own 'franchise' as they see fit.

Is the outreach you speak of a preaching outreach, does it include aspects of social service (provision of food, water, health, education etc) – or is its entire focus on social service (performed in the spirit of Christ’s comment that "inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me")?

It's my impression that whether a particular project is faith based or not isn't the important distinction for us at Social-Edge -- our focus is on entrepreneurial spirit with social impact.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 12, 2006 12:51 pm (#6 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi John, and welcome to the SocialEdge forums.

I very much appreciate your pointing us to Ford Foundation and Aspen Institute resources on the topic of scale – one of the best affordances of a web portal such as our is the chance to bring resources together in a way that facilitates a fast learning curve for best concepts and practices in a given area. We’re also interested in building community, in the sense of bringing the people who post here together in ways that facilitate mutual trust and regard – the foundations of successful networking – so I’d like to invite you to comment at some point on your own work for Ford, your areas of interest etc.

On the specific topic of scaling, the Aspen Institute site you linked to details an approach which will provide:

• A new model for moving to scale with applicability in community development finance and, more broadly, in other areas of the nonprofit arena.
• A better understanding of the critical stages through which individual organizations and a field must move to reach scale, and the obstacles/challenges at each stage.
• A better understanding of interventions, intermediaries, systems and infrastructures that can facilitate and/or accelerate the process of moving to scale.
• A better understanding of the funding needed at each stage, and who the broader universe of partners/participants/stateholders might be.
• Descriptions of future research activities to fill gaps in knowledge and/or test critical hypotheses.

As the documentation points out, the examples are titled towards community development, but the approach / methodology may prove beneficial in other areas of social impact.

I’d like to ask you for your own sense of scaling up in general and franchising in particular. Many of the projects we discuss here are located in the developing world, and differences of culture and resources may be greater than within, say, the American urban environment. Is it your sense that “scaling up” in these circumstances should focus on something other than the organizational level, and if so, what other options do we have for optimizing the impact of our best practices a widely diverse circumstances?

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 12, 2006 12:54 pm (#7 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi John:

In the Ford publication on pathways to large-scale impact you refer us to, I was impressed by the final paragraph of Elizabeth Campbell’s Forward:

While all frameworks are flawed in that they cannot fully capture real-world complexities, many can be helpful in organizing ideas and actions. We offer ours as a potentially useful tool for grantmakers and social-change agents wrestling with the puzzle of obtaining greater impact in their quest to eliminate poverty and injustice.

One of the reasons that so many of our frameworks are flawed is that our attempts to explain them are based on sequences of thought that run from premises or initial assumptions, via example and counter-example to conclusions and / or decisions -- while the typical "shape" of real-world complexities and problems, however is far closer to a net or web of tensions between different ideas or voices – better represented by a concept map than by a through-line.

I have a keen personal interest in developing humanistic thinking tools to mimic nets or webs of tensions of this kind, with special emphasis on the inclusion of emotions -- which give intensity and coloring to the tensions involved – and a special interest in the application of such tools to conflict resolution in particular.

One of the major differences between linear (text based) analyses and visual (concept mapping) approaches is that they don’t privilege some of the ideas in play over others – whereas linear presentations (as in white papers, etc) emphasize assumptions and conclusions, and tend to polarize other positions accordingly. But this in turn carries a powerful implication for our manner of thinking about such things:

It implies that raising and holding a question in mind may in some sense be "truer" to the nature of complex problems than any particular closure-providing answer…

That's a somewhat unexpected idea, considering our society's usual "decision-support" orientation, isn't it?

tutormentor - Apr 13, 2006 3:50 pm (#8 Total: 25)
Cabrini Connections Tutor/Mentor Connection

I think part of the answer to whether or not an organization should scale up is what type of revenue stream does the organization have to support its operations in one or more places; and what type of work does the organization do.

For instance, in the traditional business model people exchange dollars for goods and services. If a business offers something people want at a fair price, most people will buy. Henry Ford got rich on this concept.

However, most non profits, supported by philanthropy or government grants, can't depend on this simple cash for goods/services exchange.  Donors and grant makers are driven by many different emotions and politics, which means money does not flow consistently to any single organization on a consistent basis for a long time.

This article by Clara Miller, titled The Looking-Glass World of Nonprofit Money: Managing in For-Profits’ Shadow Universe, does a great  job of illustrating why non profits struggle so much to be successful:  http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/section/704.html

Thus, it would be foolish to try to operate multiple locations if you cannot assure consistent funding for staff and services.

A second consideration is the nature of service. If an organization is a "cookie-cutter" operation, that can be easily duplicated, with a few trained people, it's likely to have success operating in multiple locations. McDonalds, Starbucks, and many other corporations do this well.  However, if the complexity of operating is more in depth, and varies depending on the client/customer and the community, then it may be more difficult to assure an even level of service across many locations.

I read a study of the Quantum Opportunities Program back in 1995 (here's a link:

www.aypf.org/publications/RAA/12quant.pdf -

One thing I always remember from this research was a statement that said "while you can franchise structure,  you cannot franchise commitment". Thus, if an organization is a cookie-cutter operation that is easily duplicated, McDonalds, Starbucks, it is probably profitable to franchise. However, if the operations require a greater deal of local flexibility, or creativity, driven by variables such as the clients/customer, or the nature of the community, it's more difficult to operate multiple locations with any degree of consistency.

Thus, I  follow Stefanski's advise, “it may be more practical for the entrepreneur to simply offer their knowledge and for future entrepreneurs facing similar challenges to find and apply the knowledge to their unique conditions.”

I maintain a library of examples of what a tutor/mentor program might look like, as well as my own vision of what a program might look like. Then I organize events that enable people to look at this information and make their own choices of which ideas they will apply to their own situation.

I go a few steps further by organizing knowledge and a database of youth programs, and then leading efforts to help them get critically needed resources, so that the local owner has more of the resources he/she needs to innovate ways to keep a youth involved.

 

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 13, 2006 3:55 pm (#9 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi again, Dan:

I think your quote, while you can franchise structure, you cannot franchise commitment hits the nail on the head.

Always a pleasure to read you...

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 14, 2006 12:25 pm (#10 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Well, it's passover season for some and Holy Week for others -- I just wanted to note that if we slow down for the weekend, I hope we'll be able to pick up again therafter, and perhaps continue this discussion for another week.

And in the meanwhile, to wish all participants and lurkers the appropriate holiday good wishes...

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 20, 2006 7:45 am (#11 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Ah well, I have the feeling in any case that we've continued this conversation over in the newer "scaling" item, the one devoted to the proposition that small is beautiful, or meaningful, or appropriate -- or that appropriate is beautiful, and meaningful... however you'd like to phrase it.

Please join us over there for continuing discussion of just how to ensure that good ideas and best practices get shared in ways that are responsive to local conditions... appropriate and sustainable.

One last stab at the idea of scaling up...

Think global, the saying goes, and act local. Scaling up can be thought of as the reverse procedure: acting local, then thinking global – or at least, thinking expansively. And whereas the basic logic of "think global, then act local" ensures that the wider context is considered while focusing down on problems at the level where they can be addressed in all their local specificity, "act local, then think global" has the advantage of taking success and hopefully replicating it, or in social entrepreneurial terms, doing better by doing more of the same good.

Pamela McLean - Apr 20, 2006 12:03 pm (#12 Total: 25)

Thanks  for this discussion, and the other related ones. There is so much I would like to join in on here -  but I'd finish up writing chapters.

So - thanks to Charles and all contributors - and just an observation regarding “how the saying goes”.

I have had it wrong all this time – I genuinely thought it was the other way round.  I'm always quoting it to my Nigerian friends involved in local community development as "Act local - think global..." This is because I want them to find time to share what they know with a wider audience, because what they are doing is relevant to so many other locations in rural Nigeria – and maybe elsewhere in Africa.  They are are addressing real problems and have learnt so much over the years about what does and does not work.

It seems to me a tragedy if that expertise is only applied locally. Small is beautiful. Bottom up development is appropriate development. But local doesn’t have to stay completely local and unreplicated. We have to do far more to enable local actors to contribute to global thinking – but that entails opportunity costs for them – and local activists tend to be enormously overstretched. However they are the real experts and efforts should be made to learn from their experiences and knowledge. Surely now we have easier access to ICTs this should become more and more achievable. Maybe the saying should become  “Think global – learn local – then act” 

Pam McLean

Cawdnet convenor

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 20, 2006 1:31 pm (#13 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi Pam:

Lovely to read you here once again..

FWIW, I just googled and got 187,000 hits for think global act local and 41,600 for think local act global -- and topping them both, 940,000 for the portmanteau word, glocal !!

Where that leaves us, nobody knows!

ValerieB - Apr 20, 2006 1:31 pm (#14 Total: 25)

(oops, Charles slipped in while I was posting...)

Thought-provoking post, Pamela!

Learning how to do anything is such an iterative process. What I think a lot of us crave is the opportunity to reflect on what we are learning as we go with others on the path.

Volumes have been written about best practices, and much can be learned from reading them, but it's just so much more compelling to have a chat with someone who has been there, done that, and has some war stories to tell.

It's why I hope conversations like this one will continue.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 20, 2006 1:37 pm (#15 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi, Valerie:

Welcome to SocialEdge!

Volumes have been written about best practices ... but it's just so much more compelling to have a chat with someone who has been there, done that, and has some war stories to tell.

That's spot on, I think. And in terms of "knowledge management", that's pretty much the difference between overt and tacit knowledge right there, isn't it? The best practices manual contains the explicit knowledge people have on the subject, but it's a bit stilted and limited, whereas the "war stories" you speak of are probably passed along at the water cooler not in a formal memo, and get far closer to the heart of the subject -- and of the person listening and learning too, I'll bet!

Pamela McLean - Apr 20, 2006 2:01 pm (#16 Total: 25)

Thanks for the replies Charles and ValerieB.

Ref "Learning how to do anything is such an iterative process."

Absolutely. And it's only as you are learning that you begin to understand what the question really is (or what it should be). Which IMHO is why the "traditional format" for doing proposals is all back to front - because too much funding is directed to "giving solutions" (as defined in the funding proposal - before work gets underway). Unfortunately precious few resources are available to get the question right first - so the "solutions" are often "less than helpful". Usually the people who do understand the questions/problems are not the people providing the "solutions"  (Except where local self-funded solutions are provided to solve local problems - which is done with insufficient resources - by people too overstretched to put a proper funding proposal together). To get things right you need money,ideas, skills and  networks - too often the money goes out insufficiently supported.

Ref "It's just so much more compelling to have a chat with someone who has been there, done that, and has some war stories."- I think my rant above comes from a feeling that Valerie and I may have some similar stories

Pam 

ValerieB - Apr 20, 2006 2:50 pm (#17 Total: 25)

Er, yes, I imagine so!

I have been struck more than once with how things get sort of twisted around when one is writing a grant application... in an effort to make one's own initiative sound like a good fit for the solution proposed by the funders, one spins what is hoped to be a compelling narrative.  By the time I'm through, I almost believe the story I've written. 

It would be so refreshing to be able to write a proposal which said something along the lines of, "well, we're not sure, exactly how we are going to go about this, but we have some really smart, experienced people helping us and we think we stand a good chance of figuring it out if we're permitted to explore a bit!

Pamela McLean - Apr 20, 2006 3:32 pm (#18 Total: 25)

And what about the ones that only seem interested in paying for the fancy stuff. So when you want help to kick start a new project or part of a project they only seem interested in photo-opportunity stuff (the stuff that actually you could manage to do in  cheaper ways than they are willing to pay for) It seems they'll pay for "shiny-and-new" rather than the "make-do-and-mend" "second-hand"  "borrow-mine"  "let's make a bit more space over here" creative maximising of resources that is the cultural norm - at least it is with the projects I know. But then they but won't help with the essentials - the things that can't be rustled up without finding the necessary money - because that's "only people" or "consumables" etc..... 

tutormentor - Apr 21, 2006 1:46 pm (#19 Total: 25)
Cabrini Connections Tutor/Mentor Connection


Pamela, as one who writes too many grant requests that are mostly rejected, I feel your pain. Thus, I've been trying to change the paradygm and get funders to make choices of where they fund, based on where the need is, and what organizations in those areas are doing work that the donor wants to support.

One way to draw attention to where the need is would be for local organizations and their clients to use blogs to tell their story.

Ethan Zukerman wrote about aggregating blogs in his own blog at http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog?p-452 . I repeated his message in my own http://tutormentor.blogspot.com message of March 30, 2006.

If groups who have a common goal, or a common geography, or a common problem, can find ways to form networks of purpose, I think they can attract the attention of donors to their cause and perhaps make a significant shift in how funds are awarded.

I'm trying to apply this concept in building support for volunteer-based tutor/mentor programs.

Dan Bassill Tutor/Mentor Connection

JessicaMargolin - Apr 21, 2006 4:09 pm (#20 Total: 25)

Cameron said, "I think your quote, while you can franchise structure, you cannot franchise commitment hits the nail on the head."

But, actually you can franchise commitment to some degree:

Step 1a, you see what parameters are necessary for commitment; to the extent you can build those, there might be a decision to proceed even if those areas aren't met.

Step 1b, you determine where value is created -- where the commitment is coming from. You can then incorporate the value-creation components of the structure of the franchise model.

Step 2 is of course creating feedback mechanisms and intervention points

Step 3 is stress-testing it.

I think it's important to leverage and learn as a way to reduce risks for potential funders, organizers, volunteers, and community members.

That said, the return might be longterm for a community, so I am always hesitant with "first you start with a self-sustaining enterprise...." as a stipulation for the franchise concept.

tutormentor - Apr 22, 2006 6:16 am (#21 Total: 25)
Cabrini Connections Tutor/Mentor Connection


I agree Jessica, there are some ways to approach it. However, I don't think many of these are likely to result from the efforts of the small entrepreneurs who are creating new enterprises.

Instead, I've been looking for universities who might partner with the Tutor/Mentor Connection, to take on a role of "creating leaders" who might populate the field.

If I were a business with large sums of money, I could endow a chair at a university, or pay for this service. However, as a small non profit, my enticement is "vision" and the potential of a university to provide 'tipping point' type impact across an entire social sector.

If someone from a university wanted to tackle this problem, then some of the steps you've suggested might be steps they would consider.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 22, 2006 6:23 pm (#22 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi Pam, Val.

Okay, here’s the same basic issue surfacing in two places. Pam writes:

it's only as you are learning that you begin to understand what the question really is (or what it should be). Which IMHO is why the o"traditional format" for doing proposals is all back to front - because too much funding is directed to "giving solutions" (as defined in the funding proposal - before work gets underway). Unfortunately precious few resources are available to get the question right first - so the "solutions" are often "less than helpful".

Val writes:

things get sort of twisted around when one is writing a grant application... in an effort to make one's own initiative sound like a good fit for the solution proposed by the funders, one spins what is hoped to be a compelling narrative.

Do others here find themselves in similar situations? Is this a recurring problem, ie a pattern? Is it, in fact, not just an exception but something closer to the general rule?

What are the obstacles to changing this pattern?

What can be done in individual situations where this pattern obtains? What can be done to address this pattern at a meta-level -- ie not only in terms of your own particular situation and project, but in terms of changing the overall approach?

Dan is offering one response in his post -- the use of blogs by local organizations and their clients to tell their stories. This is a grass-roots upward response -- but are there ways to ensure that the problem faced at the grass-roots level gets heard by those who need to hear it?

Dan also suggests forming networks of purpose -- but the key point he makes, I feel, is the need for an approach that addresses the paradigm under which we're operating:

, I've been trying to change the paradigm and get funders to make choices of where they fund, based on where the need is, and what organizations in those areas are doing work that the donor wants to support

Paradigm shift. It's a very difficult task -- but it's also very high on Donella Meadows' list of Places to Intervene in a System, and thus a very powerful approach if we can manage it!

Pamela McLean - Apr 23, 2006 4:20 am (#23 Total: 25)

Reference "Places to Intervene in a System"  (Charles please give us the link).

It seems to me that there is often a good match between what funders want to achieve and what activists are trying to do. However,the mismatch comes at the point in the system where they try to communicate with each other. It is a typical problem of top-down and bottom-up failing to link up.

I am reminded of a useful analysis of this problem, by Stephen Musgrave (I could find the full reference). The analysis is based on a study of top-down and bottom-up initiatives related to e-gov in the UK, but he takes a systems approach which is widely applicable.   

He describes something that I remember as “areas of confluence” (though that my not be his exact term). Basically – he suggests that more attention needs to be given to areas of confluence if the different inputs of “top-down” and “bottom-up” are to meet together and flow on effectively. Steven addresses the problem of mismatch between the cultures by suggesting that each side should have people who are given *equal status* who meet at the area of confluence – he calls these people “information czars”.  

 

Dan’s suggestion of blogs is a step in this direction. In a way it is offering a strategy  for crossing the culture gap, so that funders can get to understand something of the culture in which bottom-up initiatives work, and, as a result offer more apporprate mechanisms for awarding funding.

 

Another example of communicating on equal terms equally at the area of confluence was the redevelopment of a public open space in a run down area of London (near Kings Cross station). It was a requirement that anyone putting forward a scheme must show evidence that their proposals reflected local opinion and need. The plan that was finally adopted had taken an innovative approach to consultation. The company concerned had provided public consultation opportunities, but recognised that no young people ever attended, so their voice was not being heard. The invitation to the consultation process simply did not seem to apply to them. I often have similar feelings about funding proposal processes.

 

To overcome the problem of youth involvement the company sent out a professional film crew, with a young person acting as interviewer. They went to local youth clubs and other spaces where young people met, and asked their opinions. The resulting video was presented along with written reports of standard consultations.

 

The point of this example is that both sides were able to communicate without leaving their cultural comfort zone. The young people presented their opinions in a natural way –speaking informally and spontaneously to someone they felt comfortable with; wearing their normal casual clothes; and on their own territory. They came up with useful insight into problems and possible solutions. Similarly the decision makers heard those opinions in their cultural comfort zone - formal suits; offices and conference rooms; considering evidence in formal ways that they felt comfortable with.

 

Somehow activists and funders have to develop a cultural meeting point that is appropriate for both sides - I'm hopeful that Social Edge is the place it could start to happen..

 

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 24, 2006 10:38 am (#24 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Pam:

You write:

Reference "Places to Intervene in a System" (Charles please give us the link).

Wioth pleasure! -- and I'll add a bonus!

Places to Intervene in a System is Donella Meadows’ classic account of where interventions will have the greatest impact -- an astonishingly important paper for anyone hoping to change the way things are. Using Jay Forrester’s systems rtheory as her basis, Meadows shows that the greatest impact doesn’t come by influencing quantities (numbers, material stocks and flows) but from playing with the rules of the system (incentives, punishment, constraints), the power of self-organization, the goals of the system, and above all the mindset or paradigm out of which the goals, rules, feedback structure arise.

http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid790.php

Dancing with Systems: What to do when systems resist change is an excerpt from Donella Meadows's unfinished last book. Systems thinking says the future can't be predicted, but it can be envisioned and brought lovingly into being. Systems can't be controlled, but they can be designed and redesigned. We can't surge forward with certainty into a world of no surprises, but we can expect surprises and learn from them and even profit from them. We can't impose our will upon a system. We can listen to what the system tells us, and discover how its properties and our values can work together to bring forth something much better than could ever be produced by our will alone. A brilliant essay in favor of a fully human and humane understanding of complex situations, problems.

http://www.sustainabilityinstitute.org/pubs/Dancing.html

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - May 3, 2006 9:29 am (#25 Total: 25)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


This may or may not be a Biob Dylan quote, I forget -- but eirther way, this event will still be open for another week, so let's all just carry on carrying on..

However, there has been very little attention to the growing number of NGOs that don’t fall into any of these categories but do consider themselves members of a global community. The reality is that there are numerous NGOs that have a strong local or national base, but are engaging internationally, many of them outside of the focus and programs of national networks and support groups, and thus often without useful resources.

What do I mean by the term engaging internationally? It is probably not a term unique to me, but I use it to refer to organizations that are in this growing group that are rooted firmly in local communities, or nationally, but have found ways to be part of a great global community while continuing to serve their local constituencies. It may not be apparent from the outside looking in, or even from their mission statement, but it can play a major role in influencing the organization they are, and how they do business. Often organizations evolve in their international engagement along a spectrum of engagement, becoming more engaged over time, or deciding they are happy at one spot along the spectrum. If you are working with an organization that is looking to engage internationally or expand its international engagement it can be very useful for your leadership to agree on where it thinks the organization currently is on the spectrum, and where it would like to go.

Why should NGOs and others that work with them be aware of this trend? Being open to discovering ideas from other cultures or countries that can be beneficial to the organization’s own national or local programs, or providing professional development and networking opportunities for those who are affiliated with the NGO, are just two of the many reasons why saavy leaders are broadening their global awareness and mindset. The participants in the discussion this week may have others to share or want to discuss this concept further. Sometimes there may just be one or two people within the organization who are looking to convince others of this perspective and looking for some good rationales (and you may be one of them)!

If you work with a group that is increasingly becoming internationally engaged, or would like to be more internationally engaged, how can you help your colleagues, staff or volunteer peers to make this transition? It can include an organizational cultural transition, new program development or just understanding that there are “easy to do” steps to take to begin or enhance your engagement.

Some questions the organization’s leadership will want to ask include:

1. What is motivating your organization’s interest in an increased international engagement?
2. Is your organization’s culture open to a broader outlook on the world?
3. Are your vision and mission compatible with international engagement?
4. How will/could increased attention to international trends advance your mission, goals or programs?
5. What do you hope to accomplish by an increased international engagement?
6. Do you already have members or other leaders in your organization from outside your headquarters’ country? What role(s) do they play?

Or you may work with an organization that has already answered these questions and is looking for next steps. Some ideas that have worked for other organizations include:

1. Integrating attendees and speakers from other countries in your annual conference.
2. Expanding your network for information exchange and learning (forums like this are a great opportunity!).
3. Summarizing relevant international ideas and themes for your organization’s leadership and staff (perhaps as an article or column in a newsletter).
4. Integrating lessons from other countries into your own daily operations or programs.

These are just a few – there are many more that can be shared. I look forward to our discussions.

Bonnie Koenig - Jan 18, 2005 11:45 am (#1 Total: 7)
President, Going International


Welcome everyone to this discussion on operating in an international (or global) environment. I hope that we will be able to discuss our own experiences with engaging internationally and share some ideas for how to do this more effectively. I suspect that we all might be on different parts of the spectrum (from working with organizations that are primarily local or national but are just beginning to engage internationally, across the spectrum to those that operate more globally) so it might be helpful when you post a message if you share the perspective you are coming from with us.

Feel free to focus on any of the topics I’ve raised in my Introduction to the workshop. I’ve chosen one as well to help get us started: If you are currently working with an organization that is looking to engage more effectively what are some of the challenges you are facing?

Bonnie

oliver - Jan 19, 2005 5:53 am (#2 Total: 7)
Web Community Resource Networks


Hi everyone,

Thanks for the intro Bonnie.

Web Networks is a unique non-profit web service provider, based in Canada. We are extending our work with the Inuit to assist other aboriginal groups world wide use technology to support their culture and language.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has published a story about this work in the territory of Nunavut to provide a new platform for Inuktitut computing, Attavik.net

We are interested in hearing from anyone interested in assisting--I'm at 1.800.932.7003 x.18 or oliver@web.net

Thanks,

Oliver Zielke, Executive Director
web.net

Evelyn Arce White - Jan 19, 2005 7:36 am (#3 Total: 7)
International Funders for Indigenous Peoples


Thank you Bonnie and Oliver for your comments on such an important topic. My name is Evelyn Arce-White and I work for International Funders for Indigenous Peoples (IFIP) a recognized affinity group of the Council on Foundations . IFIP is an association of donors that support or are interested in supporting Indigenous Projects internationally.

Our mission is not only to provide a forum to funders to effectively increase resources to Indigenous communities internationally but to bridge the leadership and vision of Indigenous communities to the philanthropic world.

I do feel that giving internationally is a topic that still has a whole lot of room for organizing and research. For instance, we have seen research that shows that US Foundations give 1/4 of one percent to native projects in the US but there is no stats yet for how much is given internationally to Indigenous projects. The only other stats that I have seen is US foundations give 3% internationally but 2% goes to European projects so I would guess a very very small amount goes to really grassroots org and indigenous communities.

I think one of the best ways to link all of our circles is to attend meetings and conferences that address this topic inorder to learn the latest and who to partner up with and build RELATIONSHIPS. I believe strongly in collaboration and I think we waste alot of money and time because we sometimes don't want to collaborate and combine our resources.

IFIP is holding it 's annual conference on May 19 and 20 in NYC and welcomes donors to register. We will be bringing in expertise to speak about the latest on how the Patriot Act is affecting international grantmaking and how now several Indigenous communities are being labeled terriorist, we will be looking at International Indigenous educational and language intiatives and also look at some funding strategies, coordination and long term goals of the Indigenous peoples that were affected by the Tsunami amongst other topics such as sustainable development and environment.

IFIP has collaborated with First Peoples Worldwide in publishing the "Indigenous Peoples Funding and Resource Guide" that was developed to assist Indigenous communities and grassroots org to become effective grantseekers inorder to build capacity for their communities. We have been able to distribute hundreds in English and Spanish to communities and org all over the world and do so by asking donors to purchase hard copies for their grantees, it is a win-win situation. The guide is 167 pages and has a listing of over 200 foundations, elements of writing a proposal and provides techniques on how to research foundations with a listing of resources.

If you want more info about IFIP, how to become a member and our work, send me an email at ewhite@firstnations.org

Respectfully, Evelyn

Bonnie Koenig - Jan 19, 2005 8:24 am (#4 Total: 7)
President, Going International


Thank you Evelyn and Oliver for your posts. I agree with Evelyn that “giving internationally is a topic that still has a whole lot of room for organizing and research”. I see that Caroline Hartnell of Alliance will be hosting a workshop on Social Edge on this topic next month.

Evelyn (and Oliver indirectly) also make a very important point about relationship building. As most people who are reading these posts are most likely aware, relationship building is very important to succeeding internationally. However, those of us who are not from cultures where the time needed to build relationships (sometimes even years) is a given, can underestimate the amount of time and commitment building successful relationships cross-culturally and across national boundaries will take. I have found that this is an important shift in organizational culture that may need to take place in local or national organizations that are increasing their international engagement.

Bonnie

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Jan 22, 2005 7:02 pm (#5 Total: 7)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Bonnie, you wrote:

those of us who are not from cultures where the time needed to build relationships (sometimes even years) is a given, can underestimate the amount of time and commitment building successful relationships cross-culturally and across national boundaries will take

Thank you so much for this. It gets, I believe, right to the heart of enduring relationship, which is trust -- a real, human quality, not something that can be recommended over the weekend by a seminar leader, noted on the back of an envelope and be in place in one's life on Monday.

I see many drivers in the social entrepreneurial community that have to do with quantity -- and the urgency and vast scope of need in the recent tsunami are illustration enough of how important quantity, scaling and speed can be -- but here in the social sector above all, it seems to me, we must remember the importance of the qualitative, of the small and the slow and the subtle as well as the vast and the accelerated and the basic.

Both head and heart have their blessings, and likewise both the quantitative and the qualitative, both the immediate and the profound. Let's make sure we don't lose sight of the significance of either one.

Trust is a wonderful example of this -- there's a kind of quick trust that we very often rely on, that's based on signalling the immediacy of a situation -- but like so many other "quick" versions of things, it's a temporary fix, and its enduring counterpart, though more costly in time, effort and sincerity, is far more reliable and richly rewarding for all involved in the longer term.

Bonnie Koenig - Jan 24, 2005 1:25 pm (#6 Total: 7)
President, Going International


You make a wonderful point about the balancing of the quantitative and the qualitative, and the need to be flexible in how we balance them – this goes back to one of the themes I initially introduced about the false dichotomies that are out there and how important it is to understand that what may appear to be at opposite ends of a spectrum, are not always mutually exclusive.

You can often start a relationship (especially in the entrepreneurial or “private sector” environment – where something tangible needs to get done right away, or goods or services need to be exchanged) but it is often hard to sustain that relationship unless you take the time to build it. This is something that engaging in the international environment – and taking time to learn about different cultures – can teach all of us. Your example of the tsunami relief is illustrative – it is one measure to organize the important but temporary relief supplies, and a whole different challenge and set of measures to organize programs that are sustainable once the initial media focus has passed.

I have been told of a Chinese proverb that talks about the many levels of trust – from the casual (or business) relationship where you might trust someone in a one-time exchange, all the way to the trust between a parent and child, and how important it is to understand at what level trust has been given.

Do others have examples of where they or their organization have learned lessons from other cultures through engaging internationally?

Bonnie Koenig - Jan 25, 2005 7:21 am (#7 Total: 7)
President, Going International


Thank you to everyone who joined the workshop this week - either by actively posting or by just "stopping by" to see what ideas were being discussed. I hope you found some ofthese ideas thought provoking...and continue to work with them. Making local-global linkages can be a powerful tool for the work we all do.

Bonnie Koenig Going International

In 2004, EcoLogic Finance went before its Board to seek approval for expanding its activity beyond its initial focus on Latin America. This paper lays out the factors that led to this decision and thereby frames some of the key strategic and logistical issues involved in the decision of expanding an organization’s geographic reach.

What factors may prompt this process?

• Growing global demand for your product or service. In our case, the global demand for “sustainable” coffee trade finance has been and is expected to continue growing exponentially. The fastest growing market is in East Africa, which is where we first expanded to in late 2004. In terms of overall size, the next largest markets outside of Latin America are in East Timor and Indonesia, which is where we expect to be working by 2006.
• First mover opportunities for your sector. Based on our track record and growth, we are well positioned to be a leader in our field, but only if we have the breadth to address the global need, not just that of Latin America.
• Request of key stakeholders. A critical part of the success of our business model involves working closely with premier market makers like Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Royal Coffee, and Starbucks Coffee Company. When, across the board, these important partners expressed enthusiasm for expanding collaborative efforts to places outside of Latin America, it was difficult to ignore.

If you have a “repeatable formula” there may be a business advantage to expanding your geographic reach.

In December 2003 the Harvard Business Review published an article called “Growth Outside the Core,” which outlines some important lessons from private sector companies that are relevant in considering geographic expansion. In a study of the drivers of profitable, sustainable corporate growth, they analyzed 181 different companies in the 1990s, and reached two major conclusions: first, they found that most sustained, profitable growth comes when a company pushed out the boundaries of its core business into a so-called adjacent space. They identified six types of “adjacencies,” ranging from adjacent links in the value chain to adjacent customers to adjacent geographies.

The second finding was that companies consistently and profitably outgrow their rivals by developing a formula for expanding those boundaries in predictable, repeatable ways. Companies that hit upon a repeatable formula have success rates of twice that, and some drive their rates up to 80% or higher. Repeatability allows the company to systematize the growth and, by doing so, take advantage of learning-curve effects (e.g., repeating formula over and over again to refine skills and systematize processes that are developed mostly through guesswork the first time). The majority of standouts have one or two powerful, repeatable formulas that generate successive waves of new growth, allowing them to push beyond the boundaries of their core businesses.

The authors conclude that combining repeatable formulas with adjacent geography can often lead to a breakthrough in performance. Specifically, they cite numerous companies that successfully made adjacency moves with little risk by simply changing a single variable – geography – but continuing to sell the same product to the same customers using the same repeatable formula. Thus, risk was managed effectively because the product sold did not change in terms of customers, supply chain, or market channels.

In looking at this description, we realized that we had the exact ingredients the authors claim makes for a successful performance recipe. Namely, we would be dealing with the same buyer partners, the same supply chains, and the same products; we would be changing essentially only the variable of geography.

Armed with not only the adequate motivation to consider this decision, but also the potential for this being a path toward “breakthrough performance” in achieving our mission, we got down to the brass tacks of what we needed to consider to move this initiative forward. During the workshop, we invite you to consider whether your organization might be ripe for expanding its geographic reach, including identifying whether you have a “repeatable formula” that will not only help you serve a larger marketplace, but also my be a linchpin for breakthrough performance for your organization. Furthermore, we invite you to consider and think of additional such as the listed below that will important in taking this step:

• How would geographic expansion affect your current operations and organizational structure?
• Do you have a realistic handle on the costs of expansion to new areas?
• How transferable is your model to other geographies?
• How will you address the language barrier in new locations?
• Are there greater risks inherent to new areas versus your existing geographic focus?
• Are there more untapped opportunities in your existing geography that you should consider before expanding geographically?

John Berdes - Jun 14, 2005 5:48 pm (#1 Total: 4)
ShoreBank Enterprise Pacific

We are grappling with a similar suite of issues in rural coastal Oregon and Washington. In the last decade we've successfully and serially appended new geographic markets that share a history of reliance on natural resources, and thus culture, beliefs, values (in a broad sense). We've used these commonalities--and a shared crisis of economic restructuring--to deliver relevance to our portfolio of loans and relationships. But the combined and contiguous geography does not add up to scale, so we've settled on the interim notion of "density of impact" to achieve relative "scale of impact". Now we are seeking avenues to export our "advantaged" product lines--small business and community development finance--to other rural communities in the Pacific NW.

We're not dealing with a language barrier--just a culture barrier (think wheat instead of fish and trees). We're pretty clear that efficiencies are available through transaction volume, and we hope enough so that we can continue to customize investment terms rather than demand "conformity" from people who need anything but conformity. Technology--in sales and management--is clearly an expensive challenge. Likewise, we know that customer intimacy (read: localness) is necessary to take more than nominal investment risks (and manage them for return).  Finally, true scale will demand an urban presence--easy to do, difficult to achieve while remaining relevant to rural communities and people.

Willy Foote - Jun 15, 2005 4:43 pm (#2 Total: 4)
EcoLogic Finance

John, you are right that geographic expansion is one way to achieve volume and thereby, scale, but it can be easily thwarted without a good understanding of "cultural" factors.

We have definitely dealt with a number of cultural factors in our first foray into Africa.  It became clear very quickly that a key to our successful expansion was going to involve leveraging relationships with groups on the ground that had that "cultural" knowledge.  Are there partners outside your normal realm that you might look to help navigate the cultural barriers? 

In our case, we quickly found that the East African Fine Coffee Association would be a strong ally in the process.  The direct parallel for this organization serving Latin America isn't an on-the-ground type organization.  Hence, we would have never initially suspected that this type of organization would provide us the type of intelligence that would help us address cultural issues.

Another thing to consider is that, perhaps "scale of impact" may be the place you should continue to focus until some of the factors are in place i.e. the market demand and the relationships.

 

Pamela McLean - Jun 16, 2005 4:04 am (#3 Total: 4)


Willie Foote wrote "Look for partners that can help you with the cultural barriers... geographic expansion... can be easily thwarted without a good understanding of "cultural" factors...in our first foray into Africa. It became clear very quickly that a key to our successful expansion was going to involve leveraging relationships with groups on the ground that had that "cultural" knowledge..."

It is great to see this point raised, and the increasing appreciation of the need to work in collaboration with local expertise, cultures and social structures.

In a separate thread I have written about how CawdNet (active in rural Nigeria) is separating out its social and entrepreneurial activities. We are now able to serve as "Knowledge Brokers" providing support services and introductions for people/organisation who want to explore and develop their interests in Africa - especially, but not exclusively, in rural Nigeria.

Pam

Willy Foote - Jun 16, 2005 7:27 pm (#4 Total: 4)
EcoLogic Finance


CawdNet sounds like they're really on to something by disagregating their social and entrepreneurial activities in rural Nigeria. Not that these components aren't inextrictably intertwined, but it makes sense to tease out one's understanding of local expertise, cultures and social structures from the core entrepreneurial activities of an enterprise. I'm curious though, in offering this bundled knowledge as a value proposition in and of itself to folks looking to develop interests in Africa, does CawdNet capture that value through a service fee of some sort?

On a related note, and perhaps this is somewhat unique to our "green" lending strategyy, but we have found that one of the best sources of on-the-ground "cultural knowledge" is actually our buyer partners in the US and Europe. Not that they're all experts in local culture per se (i.e., languages, political nuances at village level), but within the context of local business culture as it interfaces with international trade, the best source of insider perspectives on what's doable and what's not -- in our case, how to manage risk in the ag lending sector -- often comes from international buyers who have been working on the ground for years. As long as we, as a financial-services nonprofit offering concrete benefits to buyers and sellers engaged in direct commerce between the North and South, can demonstrate a win-win propostionto these supply chain partners, our business allies provide a wealth of intel on cultural factors that affect business results in the field.

Scale in most industries has a fairly clear definition and includes a range of options, such as franchising, joint venture partners, or a centralized organic structure. In the field of social enterprise, however, scale is a more elusive concept.

Scale requires a meaningful growth in the volume of what an organization produces and delivers, with a corresponding impact on lowering the production or delivery costs of providing goods or services. Scale also means thinking about replicating the delivery of products and services in other locations, either through direct replication, franchising or partnership with other organizations. How can this be achieved?

Debating Scale

Academics agree that scale presents a challenge to all enterprises, especially those in the social sector. Published articles offer advice on appropriate organizational structures, the value of networks, how to consider national expansion and tailoring solutions to local contexts. We think that an article by Dees, et. al., “Scaling Social Impact”1, may offer a simple but effective framework for the critical issues to address prior to scaling, which they term the “5 R’s”.

While this framework is not exhaustive, Acumen Fund would like to test this theory against the reality of your experience. We hope that your practical knowledge of working at the forefront of social enterprise can deepen our understanding of common challenges. We also hope that, by sharing solutions to these challenges, we can contribute to each others’ progress and growth.

Readiness - Is the innovation ready to be spread?

Before spreading an innovation, you should ask yourself whether there is sufficient evidence of success: i.e. are you sure it will work anywhere? Your success may be dependent on unique leadership or local conditions that may not be present in a new location.

To determine readiness, you should articulate your project’s “specification”: what factors contribute to its success and how each factor relates to the goal. The aim is to standardize the innovation so that it can be implemented without the presence of the founder.

This specification should be simple, containing as many elements as needed, but as few as possible. It might be helpful to begin by calculating the unit cost of impact (e.g. dollars/house) and determining whether that level of efficiency can be achieved elsewhere. If not, why not?

Receptivity - Will the innovation be well-received in the target communities?

Even if you carefully define your target market, each community will respond differently to your efforts. Will all your customers or recipients understand the innovation and what it has to offer? Does it represent a major change for them? Are there already existing alternatives that you will have to compete with or address?

Innovations must consider the social context of new communities. Will the residents trust you and your representatives? Will there be resistance, and if so, how can you overcome it? Are the target communities willing and able to invest time and resources in adopting your innovation?

Resources - What resources are required to get the job done right?

Some ways of scaling up require fewer resources than others. Often, working with partners can reduce your cost and increase your capacity, without giving up too much independence or control. If you choose not to collaborate, your ability to recruit and train capable staff may determine the rate at which you can expand.

Lack of funding often prevents organizations from scaling up. How long will your current source of income last? Do you need to develop short-term (donor) funding to scale up? And will you be able to generate income after that funding runs out?

Risk – What are the chances that things don’t turn out as expected?

It is difficult to predict the future. Entrepreneurs should consider the possible outcomes of their expansion and have a plan for each course of events. For example, some communities may implement the innovation incorrectly, or worse yet, abandon it entirely. You can reduce this risk by maintaining control over new parts of the organization, but this might also prevent new branches from adapting to their particular situation. What can an organization do to grow rapidly while minimizing its risk?

Returns - What is the bottom line in terms of quality and quantity of impact?

You should decide how you hope to balance the quantity of impact (i.e. how far the innovation is spread) with the quality of impact (i.e. how well the innovation is implemented or delivered). There is usually a trade-off here: a more loosely controlled organization may yield a greater quantity of returns, whereas tighter management may increase the quality.

Questions for discussion

1. How does an organization decide if its innovation is ready to scale?
2. How do you determine whether your innovation will be well-received in other communities?
3. How can you ensure adequate resources for scale and replication?
4. How do you assess the risk of attempting to scale and replicate your organization?
5. What organizational structure (branching, collaboration, franchising, etc.) would increase your reach without compromising your service?

1: "Scaling Social Impact: Strategies for spreading social innovations" by Gregory Dees, Beth Battle Anderson and Jane Wei-skillem, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Spring 2004.

Jacqueline Novogratz - Jul 5, 2005 3:57 pm (#1 Total: 17)
CEO, Acumen Fund


The Acumen Fund staff is looking forward to an interesting dialogue with all of you over the next week. In addition to responding to the kick-off questions above, please feel free to raise any other issues you feel are relevant.

Warm regards,

Jacqueline

Cgasca - Jul 6, 2005 2:50 pm (#2 Total: 17)
Social Entreprenuer


I liked the 5 R's as an outline for exploring if an organization is ready to scale up as theorical framework.

On the ground I would however, look at the effectiveness of organizational operations. How many staff do you have? Can they communicate effectively and make difficult decisions even if it means conflict? Is the link between operational performance and meeting mission goals clear? Does staff demonstrate entreprenuarial problem solving skills? What are the organizational decision making processes and do they match the nature of the project, for instance consensus versus entreprenuarial decision making models.

In addition one could consider the financial sources of funding, do they match the uses? Do the funds have the right characteristics and longevity to complete the scale up phase? How does the balance sheet look? Does the organization have the financial capacity to take on risk without loosing existing programs and service?

I was also happy to see the warning that what is accepted in one community may not be in the next. In Canada we started a micro enterprise fund using the Grameen bank model. However, it did not work in the Canadian cultural context so we modified to fit. It is important to understand that best practices or models are not always transferable to other cultural contexts.

I visited your website and was very impressed by the scope of your work. I am trying a similar approach but operating North America and utilizing joint venture agreements with the private sector. I am avoiding nonprofits as their decision making cycle is too long and funding sources are often too restrictive, unreliable(short term) and with poor timing (it can take too long to obtain funds).

However, being committed to community well being I am exploring how to achieve the same results using private sector methods and incentives. I have chosen to focus on the needs of the secondary labor market (working poor).

mitra - Jul 7, 2005 3:59 am (#3 Total: 17)
Natural Innovation


This article is thought provoking. I am interested in scalability, both for innovative ideas, and organisations, because without the scaling it is hard to have a real impact. I'm a big believer in the three-stage process for solving a problem.

1: Do it once - prove an idea works in the real world 2: Replicate, or scale it - make the effects multiply 3: Leave it - because any idea or organisation dependent on its founders isn't sustainable.

Back in 1988-89, some of us took a project we were working on, and scaled it internationally. So I thought it might be interesting, to apply the points from the article retrospectively. I believe the thinking behind the replication may be applicable to other situations.

The project was introducing the NGO world to online communication and information sharing, the first two cases being GreenNet (www.gn.apc.org) (which I started) and IGC/PeaceNet/EcoNet. The scaled project became the Association for Progressive Communications (www.apc.org) and it spread to Australia, Canada, Nicaragua, Brazil in that first year, and now to maybe 25 countries.

I should say, this is my personal opinion, and everyone involved in the process will of course have seen it differently!

1: Readiness: Is the innovation ready to be spread. "Before spreading an innovation, you should ask yourself whether there is sufficient evidence of success: i.e. are you sure it will work anywhere? Your success may be dependent on unique leadership or local conditions that may not be present in a new location."

We were confident that our idea was NEEDED everywhere, not that it would definately work. It was certainly dependent on leadership, so the key to replicating it was finding appropriate leaders in each country who we could support to adapt our idea to their context. We felt that there was an urgency to solve the problem

"To determine readiness, you should articulate your project’s “specification”: what factors contribute to its success and how each factor relates to the goal. The aim is to standardize the innovation so that it can be implemented without the presence of the founder."

The challenge I believe is to figure out which bits need to be standardised, and which need to adapt to be adaptable, I don't believe the cookie-cutter approach works especially if moving to new countries or cultures.

"This specification should be simple, containing as many elements as needed, but as few as possible. It might be helpful to begin by calculating the unit cost of impact (e.g. dollars/house) and determining whether that level of efficiency can be achieved elsewhere. If not, why not?"

We certainly didn't go into that much detail, each case had to work out how to make it work in their unique situations.

Receptivity - Will the innovation be well-received in the target communities?

"Even if you carefully define your target market, each community will respond differently to your efforts. Will all your customers or recipients understand the innovation and what it has to offer? Does it represent a major change for them? Are there already existing alternatives that you will have to compete with or address?"

At the time we were developing the APC there were was very little competition the idea, and we found that in many cases our approach was sufficient enough of an improvement that the "competitors" became the local affiliates. The lesson here is that if your idea is that much more effective then the competion gets co-opted, and the "competitors" are also the most likely to have good ideas that you should be learning from.

"Innovations must consider the social context of new communities. Will the residents trust you and your representatives? Will there be resistance, and if so, how can you overcome it? Are the target communities willing and able to invest time and resources in adopting your innovation?"

Our decision process involved identifying communities where people were already trying to solve the problem, and then working with them. Yes, of course there was resistance (to using modems instead of phones), but that was part of the challenge.

Resources - What resources are required to get the job done right?

"Some ways of scaling up require fewer resources than others. Often, working with partners can reduce your cost and increase your capacity, without giving up too much independence or control. If you choose not to collaborate, your ability to recruit and train capable staff may determine the rate at which you can expand. Lack of funding often prevents organizations from scaling up. How long will your current source of income last? Do you need to develop short-term (donor) funding to scale up? And will you be able to generate income after that funding runs out?"

This is a very good point, our methodology involved sending a staff person from an existing node to a new partner for a period of a few months. We would also work with the new node to raise grants specifically for each new node, using our credibility (we'd done it ) and theirs (local knowledge) as a more convincing argument. We also raised funds earmarked for the expansion as their was resistance to using locally generated funds for it.

Risk – What are the chances that things don’t turn out as expected?

"It is difficult to predict the future. Entrepreneurs should consider the possible outcomes of their expansion and have a plan for each course of events. For example, some communities may implement the innovation incorrectly, or worse yet, abandon it entirely. You can reduce this risk by maintaining control over new parts of the organization, but this might also prevent new branches from adapting to their particular situation. What can an organization do to grow rapidly while minimizing its risk?"

I think risk is inevitable, providing an on-site staff-person was important to reducing it, also integrating the new partner fully into the organisation as quickly as possible so that problems could be sold. However I think its important also to allow for failure, and accept that it can be better to try 10 cases and fail in 2, than to spend the next year sifting through the 10 and only work with the 2 or 3 absolute certainties.

Returns - What is the bottom line in terms of quality and quantity of impact?

"You should decide how you hope to balance the quantity of impact (i.e. how far the innovation is spread) with the quality of impact (i.e. how well the innovation is implemented or delivered). There is usually a trade-off here: a more loosely controlled organization may yield a greater quantity of returns, whereas tighter management may increase the quality."

I disagree strongly that tight control yields greater quality. On the contrary, working to support a local organisation to adapt made sure that the quality was maintained. This is particularly important for innovations coming out of America, where there seems to be a tendency to think the whole world works the same way!

I hope this retro-spective is useful to others, though the Q&A might not reflect the process we went through totally.

- Mitra www.mitra.biz/blog

(responses please to my email mitra@mitra.biz, or in the topic, please don't send messages to the messages system here as it doesn't notify me by email and I don't get to see them! )

Stefanski - Jul 7, 2005 8:38 am (#4 Total: 17)
Bazaar Strategies

Very thought provoking subject matter - thanks to our host.

In reading the summary and reactions, it seems that although it is not implicitly stated (so I could be misinterpreting), there appears to be a false assumption that it is up to the incumbent innovator/entrepreneur to assess where and how to scale their solution.  This is a reasonable assumption for a profit-driven organization where market capture is an important facet of profit maximization.  But for a social enterprise, isn't an outcome of financially self-sustaining while achieving the greatest social return optimal?  If so, it seems more practical for the entrepreneur to simply offer their knowledge and for future entrepreneurs facing similar challenges to find and apply the knowledge to their unique conditions that they know best.  This thinking may not work for a product producing entrepreneur like ApproTEC where scale of production is a factor.  But for a service-oriented solution such as the wonderful New Heroes case of Albina Ruiz trash collection in Peru, I think this is a more appropriate approach.

I suppose there is a role for some sort of franchising model where licensing revenues could be applied to increasing awareness about the entrepreneur's solution, although it is probably more efficient to leave that task to 3rd party communication intermediaries.

With this in mind, going back to question #1, perhaps the question could be phrased as "What does a person need to know to assess applicability of an innovation and how to apply a proven innovation in their own setting?".  Question #2 might be posed as "How does a person validate that an innovation is applicable to their community and gain necessary partnerships and support?"

Each of these questions I think begs for a set of tools/replicable methods to help guide future entrepreneurs.  Many such solution frameworks exist in the commercial sector to address such questions and I think more can be done to create and disseminate such tools for social entrepreneurs.  This I think will lead to the most effective way to propagate these innovations.  I believe Stuart Hart is active in this area at the Center for Sustainable Global Enterprise.  Are there particular methods/tools others have encountered they found helpful?

Kind regards - Scott Stefanski

karenborchert - Jul 7, 2005 10:06 am (#5 Total: 17)
The Campus Kitchens Project


Hello All, Thanks for starting this discussion. My colleague and I met recently with Greg Dees on a trip to Fuqua Business School and were excited to get some resources on scale in the social sector. For The Campus Kitchens Project, we have established what we believe is a replicable model through six pilots on college campuses. The program recycles unserved food from campus dining halls, utilizes on-campus kitchen space and student energy to prepare and deliver those meals to those in need in the community, and provides leadership opportunities to students.

We are now interested in moving toward a network of affiliated, rather than centrally owned programs for all kinds of schools: traditional 4-year institutions, high schools, middle and lower schools, and technical/community colleges.

Jacqueline's question #4 regarding organizational structure has been a major factor in our new business plan, as it directly affected many of the "R"s. According to our very helpful legal advisors, true "franchising" could set up some paperwork and legal needs that would really tax our resources, increase our risk, and possibly bring down the receptivity for potential host schools.

We have chosen instead to try a "licensed affiliate" model where each local Campus Kitchen will be hosted and fully owned by the school, who will license the use of CKP's name and mark. Licensees will then have access to the CKP training, resource library, intranet, and ongoing support. The license's renewal each year will be contingent on the affiliate adhering to CKP's basic programmatic and organizational standards, but will not be a true franchise. (By the way, we've learned that saying "franchise" is ill-advised if it's not a true legal franchise.)

Have others had success or specific challenges with this type of model? Have you used other models for scaling that you have found to be more effective?

Our greatest challenge at this point is actually putting the model fully into action. Resources don't allow for a full-out recruitment/scouting trip for new Campus Kitchens, yet in order to expand, we will need to get the materials and information out to as many school administrators, dining services staff, and service learning coordinators as possible. Any advice you have on this would also be very helpful.

paul_hudnut - Jul 7, 2005 9:26 pm (#6 Total: 17)

 

First, the article that is summarized is: "Scaling Social Impact Strategies for Spreading Social Innovations." Stanford Social Innovation Review 1, no. 4 (spring 2004): 24-32.

Second, I' like to comment on one issue of scaling that may be a key one for the "hybrid" companies, like ours. We are a non-profit, using donor funds/investment to develop a technology to help clean up the air in Asian cities by retrofitting 2 stroke motorcycles. We plan to sell these retrofits as our primary business.  My comments reflect our plans, anticipated challenges and ideas, as we have not yet started sales.

These sales will provide our company with a small operating profit in time; however, we are aiming at making a significant impact. To do this, we will need to install hundreds of thousands of retrofit kits. The scale requirements to fund this level of inventory through our supply chain are significant. It is a challenge we will need to overcome as our business begins to grow. In a for-profit, debt financing could be used, but this is more difficult for a non-profit, operating with thin margins in Asia. But I am not aware of any non-profits that have been able to achieve significant scale of sales of a manufactured product.

My belief is that as other entrepreneurs tackle similar chronic problems with distributed solutions, they too will encounter this issue. Perhaps another enterepreneur will come up with a financing solution.

We have begun to investigate several ideas to address this challenge, but my belief right now is that at least in the early years, our supply chain will need to "clear" within the net payment period. In other words, the microfinance lending for the motorcycle driver will need to fund the various suppliers within the "net __ days" period. This is indeed a challenge in a supply chain with components coming from Europe and U.S. as well as Asia.

We are also looking at a franchise type approach for developing a system of installation garages in the Philippines. Our plan is to keep these very basic, for two reasons. First, the simpler they are, the easier they are to replicate. And second, the simpler they are, the cheaper they are to start, and the more likely the can be started with minimal capital.

A final observation. By being mission driven, instead of profit driven, I agree with one of the earlier posts that this provides a potential for faster dissemination and, perhaps, less need for control over the business model, franchise approach, etc. We will gauge our success by whether retrofit (or other cleaner transportation)technologies become ubiquitous, not necessarily by the size of our organization. Different capabilities and approaches in different areas may increase the speed of diffusion.

We will see!

Peter Reese - Jul 8, 2005 10:51 am (#7 Total: 17)

Question for the discussion as a newcomer;  Is the focus of multiplication on using similar METHODS in other settings or on achieving comparable RESULTS?

Have seen how the same METHODS yield different results (nature of the impact on individuals and communities) and how seeking the same RESULTS requires significant variation in methods.

Looking forward to your perspectives.

 

 

yzaidman - Jul 8, 2005 11:30 am (#8 Total: 17)
Acumen Fund

Reading Mr. Hudnut's entry (#6), I am reminded of the challenge that we often encounter at Acumen Fund of finding business models that address both product financing and distribution networks. Since we work with both non-profits and for-profits, we find that both share the same challenges when it comes to reaching out to low-income markets. While for-profit companies may have an easier time accessing debt financing, it is still not guaranteed for companies with an innovative technology, or a business model designed to impact social issues like poverty or the environment, and not simply maximize profit.

Products designed to address the needs of low-income consumers are often out of reach due to high capital costs. However, before this even becomes an issue, the challenge of access to working capital for retailers and distributors prevents the product from even reaching the market, whether they are for-profit or non-profit. Without guaranteed sales, a retailer or dealer is rarely willing to invest their own resources in inventory. Often both distribution and financing need to be addressed with one solution, wherein financing is secured and made available to the end user, in essence by pre-financing products and projects.

At Acumen Fund, we see the opportunity to not only invest in products and services that can be scaled up to address large social problems, but also to develop and invest in financing mechanisms that make it possible for distributors and consumers to access products and services. We are currently working on financing mechanisms for low-cost housing, urban water infrastructure, and community-scale water treatment systems. Both for-profits and non-profits need to have access to financing mechanisms that can increase access to small-scale but high impact solutions. Without innovation in this area, the ability to scale up products and services will continue to be limited.

Jacqueline Novogratz - Jul 8, 2005 2:30 pm (#9 Total: 17)
CEO, Acumen Fund

mitra - Jul 8, 2005 3:08 pm (#10 Total: 17)
Natural Innovation


I think Peter Reese raises exactly the critical point, of course the same METHODS will create different RESULTS in different contexts. I believe the key is combining the knowledge of what has worked elsewhere with the local leadership and knowledge of the context, i.e. to use SIMILAR methods to create SIMILAR results.

- Mitra

DR.PRABIR DUTTA - Jul 8, 2005 10:41 pm (#11 Total: 17)
CALCUTTA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION


It works in:HEART. H-Harmonisation E:Equivalance A:Assessment R-Risk T-Transparancy

Michael Chertok - Jul 10, 2005 8:55 am (#12 Total: 17)

Interesting discussion!  I'm particularly interested in the issue of financing for scale. 

Paul Hudnut writes, "sales will provide our company with a small operating profit in time; however, we are aiming at making a significant impact...in a for-profit, debt financing could be used, but this is more difficult for a non-profit."  I think Paul faces a challenge that may be somewhat larger in scope because of the capital required for large-scale production of a 'product', but the nature of his challenge is typical for many social enterprises.

If an enterprise is likely to deliver significant financial returns to scale,  then commercial debt or even equity investment will probably be available to finance growth.  However, when scaling or replicating is primarily about social impact, it is understandably difficult to find commercial capital, even if the enterprise is well managed and will be financially sustainable or even marginally profitable.

Does this mean that social enterprise will always be dependent on philanthropic capital to scale?  Or that as social entrepreneurs we need to develop models that scale with large financial returns (perhaps sacrificing the scope of our social impact)?  Or is there some other solution?

snowymax - Jul 11, 2005 12:28 am (#13 Total: 17)
israel venture network

 

Hi Everyone, Hi Jacqueline!

Isabel Maxwell here in Israel, International [Active] Chair of the Israel Social Entreprenreurs Program  ("SE")for the Israel Venture Network (www.israelventurenetwork.org) - a 4 year old 501 3c dedicated to systemically improving the education system here and other strategic intiatives, social programs , of which SEs is a new iniative now in its second year and selecting 3 new Fellows this summer; 2 are already active - developing innovative and sustainable solutions IN Israel specifically.    I really have enjoyed this whole posting and it gave me much food for thought.

I realise that most people don't think of Israel, a country the size of the state of New Jersey,  as a "poor country", iIt does not have the huge population numbers or malnutrition or disease issues common to so many larger countries.  Its external image to the world has long been one of a 'brainy country' (!) full of military might and innovation, alas constantly in the news for its long and terrible conflict with the Palestinians.  It is this very conflict that has had an appalling long-term effect on the economy and social structures of the country as a whole, to say nothing of the long-term psychological and behavioural damage to those directly suffering from the conflict .  The education system is infact in dire straits and as a strong believer in Education as one of the best ways to attack poverty and multiple social ills, we are very interested here in SEs who have innovative solutions in the area of education, as well as in other areas such as urban renewal, the environment and conflict resolution.  As "G-Day" approaches (pull-out from Gaza day coming right up in August), we are  watching here with bated breath...

The 5 Rs are extremely helpful principles to help one stay focussed and realistic about ones project/idea.  The one thing that came to my mind strongly which I thought might be helpful to share here, thinking about my experience here in Israel with my umbrella organization, IVN, is the value of Evaluation and Partering.

Professional and real Evaluation of projects is so vital.  We have hired a professional evaluator for the organization as a whole who divides up her time among the initiatives and we have a reporting structure that forces us in a good way to really examine regularly our work in the field and its impact.  Until we did this, our initiatives were benchmarked in an ad-hoc fashion and we were not able to report back to our funders or to ourselves with any accuracy or with meaningful data.  Now that we do we have gained their confidence and their continued and expanded support.

From the very beginning, our organization has sought partners in the field and they have been of immense help, not only with monetary resources for the projects but with real help and resources on the ground in Israel.  The New Israel Fund and Sacta-Rashi organization to name but two, are such examples.  Partnering is a great way too of fighting the huge fragmentation of citizen sector organizations, and in this way, IVN has been able to distribute 10X its actual direct resource distribution in the field.

These are the two most valuable things I have learned experientially from working here on the ground for the past fourteen months. 

All the best to everyone!  And thank you to Skoll for this highly innovative and superior interactive web site which is bringing together the SEs of the world and more.

 

Attachments:

isabel maxwell.jpg (29 KB)

Cgasca - Jul 11, 2005 11:36 am (#14 Total: 17)
Social Entreprenuer


Does this mean that social enterprise will always be dependent on philanthropic capital to scale?

The nonprofit sector's source of capital is government through tax policy or program spending. Donations are driven by affinity, which could mean that when replicating a program, one needs to ensure that similar donors exist in the area. This also impacts scale possibilities as donors preferences impact how much capital is available for various community investments. Unlike for profit companies the nonprofit sector has two markets, donors and consumers of their services. Ensuring there is a donor market is equally important as determining community needs.

Do we as social entrepreneurs need to develop models that scale with large financial returns (perhaps sacrificing the scope of our social impact)? Or is there some other solution?

There is more than one solution. As social entrepreneurs it is our goal to understand, the donor market, what drives our community's well being and market opportunities, to craft initiatives that create a better world. Our solutions will be based on how well we utilize our entreprenuarial imagination and ability to dilouge (think together) to create community benefits. In this sense models could be as diverse as entreprenuers and the communities they live in.

However, if we examine or communities it is likely that we will find that populations can be broken down into:

Populations that are well served by the market. Products and services are widely available and consumers receive the value they expect.

Populations that are under served by the market. Products and services are available, however, consumers pay a premium to access services. For example; check cashing, interest only mortgages, calling cards, etc. The underserved market may exist becuase of cultural differences or a percieved lack of financial ability.

Crisis populations that are not served by the market. Products and services are not avialable or beyond the ability of consumers due to health, income, or family violence. This market is where the nonprofit sector and government program spending does most of its work.

To develop scale one could consider the underserved market as potential opportunity for expansion. The underserved market is larger than the crisis population and it generally has income. Pricing, convenient access, and realiable service are key for this market. Serving this market with product or service lines designed for them could prove to be a source of sustainable capital for social enterprises and also serve to meet our social impact goals.

Methods or results? Methods provide opportunity to develop values and affinities that can serve to improve our communities in an intagible way. Results is what we want! Scale, replication and best practices could be considered terms of reference to be validated by community needs.

Mario Oliveros - Jul 11, 2005 9:21 pm (#15 Total: 17)


Hello everyone, wonderful discussion.

I thought I would add a perspective regarding finance and scale from Asia-Pacific through an NGO called Unlad Kabayan. We employ an innovation in community-based financing to launch microenterprises in migrant communities in Asia, orginally in the Philippines and now with replications in Indonesia, Bangledesh, and South Korea.

We have developed a model called MSAI (Migrant Savings for Alternative Investment) that harnesses the development finance potential of migrant remittances. Specifically, migrants are organized into savings groups, they pool portions of their earnings, and these are invested in microenterprises, like merchant businesses, diversified farms, and manufacturing.

In some cases, we provide additional funding through microloans or we develop partnerships with the public or private sector, but in general, migrant communities are able to generate the majority, if not all of the financing to launch projects, and we have proven to be successful and replicable across a number of cultures and geographic locations.

However, our main challenge has been to achieve scale, mainly in terms of either generating additional investments or in gaining access to export markets.

The interest in the promise of remittances has grown substantially in the most recent years. With this interest, there is also doubt and skeptism. Unlad has been at this for over a decade, but still consider MSAI to be an emerging and evolving model. Nevertheless, we know we have been successful to date, and the most clear proof has been the local people we have been able to empower. However, as this discussion has demonstrated, we face the same challenges that other social organizations face, and there is no silver bullet.

I apologize that our website is currently experiencing problems, but you can read about us through an Ashoka Changemakers award we won several months ago. http://www.changemakers.net/journal/04november/contest.cfm

Jacqueline Novogratz - Jul 12, 2005 8:40 am (#16 Total: 17)
CEO, Acumen Fund

Thank you all so much for contributing to this discussion. We really appreciate your willingness to share your challenges and the lessons you’ve learned through your own experiences. As we wrap up the discussion today, I’d like to try to address some of the great points you’ve raised.

 

Thanks to Mitra (#3) for the very interesting post-mortem of APC. In a world where data is hard to come by, some of the best learning has to come from the kind of critical application of detailed case studies to frameworks like Dees, et. al. Very fair point on the nature of control and quality: innovation; more flexibility can indeed lead to important process and service improvements that will improve quality. But, it’s also true that where there are improvements, there are likely to be potential deviations from the model that detract from quality as well – in other words, some changes will be for the better, while others will be for the worse.

 

Scott Stefanski’s post (#4) was also helpful in surfacing an assumption with which we might quibble: that it is up to the incumbent innovator/entrepreneur to assess where and how to scale. We like to think that one of the more important value added services that intermediaries like Acumen Fund can play is helping to answer these questions during the due diligence process. There are several social entrepreneurs we have worked with that want to scale regionally, but have never considered national or international options for scale and replication. Not that national or international growth is necessarily the right answer, but we at Acumen Fund (and many other social investors) often help put these questions on the table and provide some of the analytical resources to help make the right decisions. One tool that we have developed to help answer these questions is a fairly simple (although it can look complex) financial and operational planning model (an Excel workbook) that asks the entrepreneur for historical and projected operating data, and then defines the required capital to achieve that level of growth (with various options in terms of debt, equity or even grant financing). While this is a fairly typical tool used in most private equity or venture capital shops, by adapting it to meet the needs of social enterprises, we have something that can help us get to this answer of whether and how to scale more quickly.

 

Karen Borchard’s innovation (#5) is quite exciting and the methodical way you are approaching scale and replication through licensing sounds like a very strategic approach. There is a great McKinsey Quarterly article on non-profit structure by Maisie O’Flanagan and Lynn Taliento (“Nonprofits: Ensuring that bigger is better,” The McKinsey Quarterly, 2004 Number 2 – it was discussed on this site when it was published) that outlines some of the pros and cons of affiliates vs. licensing vs. franchising. One resource that you might consider in terms of tapping into networks of campus administrators is the National Wildlife Federation’s campus ecology program that works extensively with university procurement officers on recycled products, renewable energy resources, and local agricultural product.

 

Paul Hudnut’s comment (#6) that mission needs trump the model is a fair point, and that diffusion of the idea might be more important than scale or replication within a particular organization or business. In its obituary of Jack St. Clair Kilby, co-inventor of the integrated circuit, The Economist this week (July 9, 2005, Vol. 376, No. 8434) notes that in Kilby’s Nobel prize lecture, he quoted fellow Nobel laureate and inventor Charles Townes as saying, “It’s like the beaver told the rabbit as they stared at Hoover Dam. ‘No, I didn’t build it myself, but it’s based on an idea of mine!’ ” I think we would agree with Paul’s point, but from a tactical perspective, believing in diffusion as paramount can tempt an organization to view “thought leadership” and policy advocacy as higher potential ways to “scale the idea” than the hard work of building the business. While we would agree that ultimately the results are what matter, don’t let that allow you to lose focus on building the business. (And if you plan to sell your product in India or Pakistan, please let us know!)

 

Michael Chertok’s point (#12) really nails the link between scale, financial sustainability, and the role of charitable capital. Acumen Fund believes that charitable capital, if converted into risk capital (debt, equity, credit enhancements), can have the patience and high-risk tolerance to help social innovations scale using the disciplines of a commercial mindset. We think that for some social innovations (but not all), financial sustainability and scale must go hand in hand, as it is hard to imagine scaling a model that has unsustainable economics at the operating unit level - otherwise, the bigger you get, the more you have to raise, which is a tall order for even the most determined fundraiser! But we believe that the sector has just scratched the surface of ways to tap into commercial capital to be used for social purposes, and think more charitable capital can be deployed to build financially sustainable enterprises.

 

Hi Isabel! Thanks also for your post (#13). You bring up an important point, which gets back to the first question we raised: the role of evaluation in assessing the readiness to scale. We have been investing heavily in metrics that aim to do the same as your evaluation initiative. We seek to work with entrepreneurs to develop a set of metrics that will help them manage their business (and assess opportunities for scale), and inform our decisions about whether we should continue, increase our investment, or consider a soft exit. We also firmly believe in creating a metrics culture where we don’t ask anyone to measure anything we are not capable of measuring and reporting ourselves. And as we realize the limits to our evaluation capabilities (and the cost of bringing them in house)—we can’t do rigorous academic studies evaluating the full impact of a malaria bednet—we have started to partner with organizations like the CDC, PhD students and professors at UC Berkeley, Michigan and Harvard to ask (and hopefully answer) questions we would never have had the resources to answer on our own.  

 

Finally, Cgasca’s point (#14) about understanding the underserved markets is exactly in line with our approach. Many of the world’s “poor” at the bottom of the pyramid have steady jobs, but face frustratingly high costs of housing, lack access to clean water, and can’t find affordable healthcare. Many of them resort to paying higher rates for legal goods, navigating the grey and black markets, or doing without. We believe that markets may never reach what Cgasca calls the crisis populations, but markets are functioning in many underserved communities—we’d just like to see them function more effectively and sustainably, in ways that give the poor access to goods and services and the dignity of choice. This, we feel, can be the right role for charitable capital to play, by taking the risk to help entrepreneurs make these markets function more efficiently, equitably and transparently.

 

Again, thank you all for your contributions to what we feel was a very productive workshop!

 

Warm regards,

Jacqueline

Grant Hunter - Oct 10, 2005 12:06 pm (#17 Total: 17)
Franchise Consultant


Hello Jacqueline,

Not sure if this discussion is still active, but as a Social Edge newbie I wanted to add my thoughts.

I work as a franchise consultant and broker, representing hundreds of traditional franchised businesses to find and qualify prospective franchisees to work in them. My goal in this arena is to identify, optimize, blueprint and market proven social enterprises. "Proven" as I use it, means that the enterprise is achieving social impact and is at least paying for itself, if not running a surplus.

RE: readiness to scale, the 5R's you list Jacqueline are a great start. With re: to franchising in particular, there are some other criteria I would look at closely (i.e. are the operations simple enough to be learned in 2-3 months? do you have the management, board and staff capacity to support a franchise channel? , etc.) Ultimately if these criteria are met, then franchising may be a compelling alternative.

Franchising helps an organization bypass the need for forfeiting equity or raising (as much) capital to expand on its own. Metrics and measures for both financial and social returns can be woven into the operations manual to scale accountability along with growth.

Social franchising is not a new idea. You allude to it Jacqueline, in the McKinsey article which I would love to see. (“Nonprofits: Ensuring that bigger is better,” The McKinsey Quarterly, 2004 Number 2) Please pass along if available. However, the twist I have on social franchising involves taking successful social enterprises and blueprinting their operations to sell to other "like-missioned" nonprofits. For example, imagine an environmentally-focused nonprofit signing on as an eco-tourism franchisee or an elderly-focused nonprofit becoming a non-medical home eldercare franchise.

To be sure, each organization, geography and population served has its own peculiarities. With so much mission-overlap in the nonprofit sphere, however, there is a place for more explicit, paid knowledge-sharing through models like franchising and licensing. I would love the chance to discuss with venture philanthropy funds like Acumen Fund, a partnership for identifying and funding successful social franchises. Replicating measurable success is a triple win for franchisor, franchisee and investors alike.

Social franchising makes sense to me. Love to hear your thoughts.

Regards, Grant Hunter

Charles Cameron writes that one of the brightest shining events of the many that SocialEdge has presented (and still contains in archived form) was the Sohodojo-inspired Small Is Good World at the Skoll World Forum.

In this week’s event, a companion to last week’s workshop on how and why to scale up, he returns to the theme of Small is Beautiful, asking for your experiences and reflections on EF Schumacher’s (small, beautiful) idea and how it applies to our field as social entrepreneurs.

Here is Toby Beresford’s description of the Small is Beautiful approach, taken from that forum.

Small is good is a change of mindset. A new way of approaching the problems and opportunities the world presents.

• In social terms it means direct one to one relationships matter – your family, your friends and your neighbours.
• In political terms it means communities matter – let the people closest to the problem choose how to solve it. It recognises that the man in Whitehall (or Washington, or Jakarta…) doesn’t know best.
• In economic terms it means small shopkeepers and producers can deliver better overall value to the consumer than giant chains. This value might come through stories of provenance (organic, free range, fairly traded), better service (be known by name), reduced environmental impact (seasonal vegetables), and local appropriateness (get your special Battersea cakes today.)

To choose small is good you have to let go of your centralising instinct. You have to believe in the potential of the empowered individual, the resilient family and the vibrant community.

How’s that for a set of criteria? Who among us doesn’t believe in the potential of the empowered individual, the resilient family and the vibrant community?

Please share with us your own experiences, questions and insights regarding the small-is-beautiful approach.

Marguerite - Apr 23, 2006 7:49 pm (#16 Total: 132)

I was delighted to review CAWD and CAWDNET -- an interesting note is that I am currently involved in a "relocalization" effort in a small community in So. Calif. that faces some of the same challenges as does CAWD. Due to the "peak oil" crisis that is about to hit us full on as gas prices escalate, we see the need to grow food locally and learn how to process it for future use. And, guess what,I've just heard some women say "But I don't know how to cook" meaning "from scratch" so use to prepackaged food we are today.  And, I'm sure that before its all over we will be grateful for solar cookers.  So there's going to be a need here for vocatonal training to enable and empower us in relearning survival skills as the costs of transportation make food and other necessities of life unaffordable for the average person as the limits to resources force change of an unprecedented magnitude upon us.  The demand for skilled counselors to aid in facilitating this change will far outstrip the supply as community after community seeks to become self-sustaining and reaches out for assistance.       

I believe networked ICTs, as CAWD views them as:  "creative combinations of ICTs and human networks" (in small communities if I may add) are the answer, and am currently constructing what is intended to be a major website as part of the worldwide ICT that is spontaniously forming. In this sense, "small is beautiful" as we create spaces for learning/remembering to take place and then apply it at the local level. Since the natural flow of the Universe is from micro to macro this will allow for a natual transformaton to take place which will be "holodynamic" in nature and  replace the hierarchial and unatural structure we have today that leaves us in an  unbalanced and dis-eased position.  

Simply due to the magnitude of the challenges the human family faces today, micro-management offers the only humane solution which will avoid large numbers of people being dropped through the cracks. 

marguerite (ecopilgrim@aabole hm) 

P.S. My website at www.tii-clics.org needs maintenance and we are working on that as well as getting up several new sites which will provide curriculum for our virtual university.  We are also linked to the International Academy of Holodynamics, another virtual university,hosted by Dr. V. Vernon Woolf, who was instrumental in creating "perestroika" in Russia.  Vern will soon have courses online at the Academy. www.holodynamics.com  Dr. Woolf specializes in the development of high performance teams to manage social change. As well, he is developing a prototype Wellness Center which uses natural healing combined with some conventional methods.  This program has been 10 years in the development stage and is designed to work in small local communities to create change through health practices.

Thank you Charles, for the opportunity to post here.

honeymgm - Apr 23, 2006 8:15 pm (#17 Total: 132)

 

Pamela McLean - Apr 24, 2006 6:13 am (#18 Total: 132)

I wish I had time to respond fully to the postings from Prof Madhukar and Marguerite. I would like to follow up areas of overlap with you both. I feel I could spend days talking with each of you exploring ways that our initiatives could complement each other – but resources do not allow. That is ironic really as we would probably find that we are duplicating effort to a ludicrous degree. Let us not forget each other’s interests.

Nigeria has the same problem that Prof Madhukar describes of graduates with no employment prospects. There are precious few real jobs on offer - unless you know people with influence. The young graduates know they should be doing something more intellectually demanding than subsistence farming, or petty trading - but what opportunities are there for self employment - other than armed robbery? That is not said flippantly - there is no social security system in Nigeria, and armed robbers are a constant threat and reality. There is such a waste of talent amongst Nigerian youths - made more tragic in my opinion because many of the young job-seeking Nigerians that I have met are idealistic, industrious and desirous of helping to create a better Nigeria.

I have heard of various initiatives that could be relevant for these young people – along small is beautiful lines that would promote genuine community development – but I haven’t got the resources to follow up those tantalising information trails on their behalf so that we can act on them.

 

Marguerite – I’m glad you relate to CAWD and Cawdnet - I see so much overlap with your concerns too - small-scale developments, enterprise, Californian and Nigerian experiences with solar energy, and more. We have much to learn and we need to learn with each other and from each other, There are so many of us doing similar things - if we consider it all under such headings as sustainable energy, enterprise and livelihoods. We need to come together more effectively – and that is what ICTs are helping us to do. It is simultaneously local and global in ways that “outsiders” do not understand. 

 

Perhaps this experience/lack-of-experience of the local-global reality is part of the conceptual difficulties that we are have sometimes regarding communication on issues of scalability and funding and suchlike. It occurs to me that the kind of activists I know, in their tiny, struggling and largely self-funded organisations are a bit like parentless children. We are continually pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps, falling on our faces, picking ourselves up, learning from our mistakes, plodding on - because things can’t stay as they are and forwards is the only possible direction. It shouldn’t all have to be learnt in the school of hard knocks. We know where we are headed – but struggle to find the words to express it to people who don’t share experience of our reality

 

I don’t really think we want to “replicate” or “scale up” our projects and organisations any any more than children want to be cloned – we just want to grow naturally. Currently we are isolated and our growth is stunted.  Our vision and energy is sapped by constant struggle for the basics of day-to-day survival that mature organisations take for granted. We need some respite and nurturing while our organisations/projects/systems continue to learn and develop and grow. We need a chance to grow up more as “part of a family” rather than as “struggling street children”. Then that family will grow, as new collaborations and replications of ideas and projects happen. Maybe I take the analogy too far – but I don’t know how else to express it.

 

I am trying to express the organic growth of “our kind” of projects and organisations. It comes back to valuing and counting-in the intangibles of information, ideas, networks, trust and all kinds of social capital. It comes back to learning as you go along, within your own projects and through information exchange with other projects. It comes back to equal partnerships, mutual-mentoring, and community-based, needs-led development– development where problems and needs are evident but poorly defined. It comes back to solutions having to emerge – not be pre-defined and imposed.

 

Hmm - and that of course brings us back to the issue of funding proposals that we were discussing a few days ago…

 

 

 

JessicaMargolin - Apr 24, 2006 11:33 am (#19 Total: 132)

Pamela said: "I don’t really think we want to “replicate” or “scale up” our projects and organisations any any more than children want to be cloned – we just want to grow naturally. Currently we are isolated and our growth is stunted. Our vision and energy is sapped by constant struggle for the basics of day-to-day survival that mature organisations take for granted. We need some respite and nurturing while our organisations/projects/systems continue to learn and develop and grow. We need a chance to grow up more as “part of a family” rather than as “struggling street children”. Then that family will grow, as new collaborations and replications of ideas and projects happen. Maybe I take the analogy too far – but I don’t know how else to express it."

Interestingly, my thoughts along this line came up because the ED with whom I was writing grants was spending so much time explaining what she was doing yet had ever-increasing requests for more explanation. In other words, it was a way to facilitate getting the 80%+ out there for her so she COULD concentrate on growing "her own" programs.

Marguerite - Apr 24, 2006 8:26 pm (#20 Total: 132)

My feelings are that writing grant proposals and waiting for funding is like waiting for a personal ride on an Apollo project -- it ain't going to happen and if it does the funding is going to be tailored to the funder's agenda and won't fit yours. There is an excellent book on this put out by Kumarian Press, sorry I can't think of the name of it right now but do a Google for them and search their catalog.  Lot's of good books written by people who have been working in development and in the know at the local level from this publisher if you haven't tapped into them as yet.  

Really do believe the answer is to create a local currency -- with the price of oil escalating we're going to see a major worldwide depression and the only way to survive this is for communities to delink from the national economy and become a sustainable living community that is self-secure regardless of where they are.  Another resource that is absolutely marvelous on this is: Global Problems and the Culture of Capitalism by Richard H. Robbins.  He also has a website on the Net so again Google for it.  He gives an example of how the Guarani in Venezuela survived for hundreds of years using a local currency and investing in the conventional market when it was to their best advantage and staying out of it when it wasn't. They also practiced a form of agro-forestry which conserved their capital and acted as their savings bank from which they did not spend.  

I think also that employment opportunities are in short supply.  The statistics are that only 30% of the worldwide laborforce, due to technological advances, is necessary to provide all of the goods and services for the 6 billion plus people on the planet. So, we have a tremendous oversupply of skilled labor.  And while the need is for entrepreneurial skills, we have millions trained in management with no place to go. Also, for the first time in the history of the world in the early 1990's the labor market became delinked from the stock markets as more people derived income from the markets through passive investments than from the efforts of human labor.  (Rifkin - End of Work 1997) Everything is stacked to create more poverty and the push is relentless.   

I have copied our discussion here and will stay in touch. We must get these ICT's up and running so we have information exchanges going.  Warm regards and love to everyone. 

marguerite  ecopilgrim@aabol.com

honeymgm - Apr 24, 2006 9:44 pm (#21 Total: 132)

following notes of anilpansari  Pamela McLean Jessica and  MargolinMarguerite down sizing is is a classical thought of all business giants . Down size to profit or scale up to profit and in the process eliminate labour , retrench office staff and  executives ,out source for momentary demand ,ditch people during lull periods and so on with their games.... .Traditional agrarian economies provided more security than the present where do the neoeducateds  go unpredictable corporations, suicidal agrarian economy

Madhukar

intechibm@gmail.com

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 26, 2006 1:55 pm (#22 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Prof. Madhukar:

Thanks for your comments. I’m not sure quite where you are going with your more recent post. As you say, businesses routinely scale up or *downsize* for reasons of ROI, and the results are often not pretty in human terms, What do you see as the solution, how does social entrepreneurship fit into the picture, can downsizing be both profitable and socially healthy?

Regards,

Charles

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 26, 2006 2:07 pm (#23 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi again, Pamela:

You write:

I wish I had time to respond fully to the postings from Prof Madhukar and Marguerite. I would like to follow up areas of overlap with you both. I feel I could spend days talking with each of you exploring ways that our initiatives could complement each other – but resources do not allow. That is ironic really as we would probably find that we are duplicating effort to a ludicrous degree. Let us not forget each other’s interests.

This must be a fairly comment sentiment among those reading and indeed posting here on SocialEdge – the sense that we’re close to forming connections that could facilitate our work, but don’t quite have the time to pursue those connections at the time of recognizing them.

One option that we’re considering is having a forum here designed specifically to invite people to make those connections – but I suspect that where very busy social entrepreneurs caught up in working the many details around an undefended project in the field are concerned, the first condition for moving to the stage where such connections are made would be to realize that they can be made slowly in an asynchronous medium such as this one.

Posting we seems to have common issues, I’m interested and would like to talk more, in other words, is in fact a first step, and I’ll get back to you in a week or so is an acceptable response, with I’ve been thinking a but since you said you were interested in our approach, and realized that one aspect of our work that might work for you too is this-and-this a week or so later beiong a follow up that really kick-starts the detailed transmission of ideas.

A slower pace may be a viable workaround for being too busy to network right away, I mean.

Hope this helps,

Charles

JessicaMargolin - Apr 26, 2006 2:25 pm (#24 Total: 132)


In my experience, downsizing is wellknown to be a manipulation to increase short term stock price in exchange for longterm value creation, except in relatively rare situation where it's an unfortunately necessary thing to do because of previously inept strategic management in organizations that actually can afford strategic and risk management processes but don't. Ironically, but with no humor, the very people who have instituted the poor systems and mismanaged the organization tend to be the ones who decide who must go when the business is, in effect, failing.

Unfortunately very small enterprises don't have the risk management or strategic planning resources available to enormous companies, so the real economy in my mind is the ability to have occasional slack to devote to those endeavors, as Pamela says.

When I first heard a Social Edge talk over a year ago, I ended up with a grid, with the speakers down one side and the reasons I would need to talk with them along the top. In that way, by simply putting a note to myself in a box, I could track which things I needed to bring up with whom.

It might be a nice enhancement to be able to grid something here, where in addition to a discussion forum there's a series of topics (for example) along one axis and people who need or have resources or ideas in those areas in the other. Some other dimension (color?) could be used to encode the urgency of the situation, so that people could enter notes in the grid box that corresponds to them; maybe an additional dimension (font, shape) would correspond to something else like distribution, or education, or physical materials.

Sort of a super-bulletin-board; in any case a different way to organize multi-noded information.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 26, 2006 2:34 pm (#25 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Marguerite:

You write:

Due to the "peak oil" crisis that is about to hit us full on as gas prices escalate, we see the need to grow food locally and learn how to process it for future use.

I've invited a friend over to join us, a man who designs sustainable and highly efficient systems in Alaska:

http://biorealis.com/resumes/projects.html

I'd be very interested to see his response to your comment.

Re your name, Turtle Island Institute... I'm a big fan of Gary Snyder, incidentally. I once had the privilege of co-teaching a course with GS, Richard Nelson and Paul Shepard at Lake Tahoe… what a fine group!

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 26, 2006 2:56 pm (#26 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hello again, Jessica:

And thanks for all your contributions here.

When I first heard a Social Edge talk over a year ago, I ended up with a grid, with the speakers down one side and the reasons I would need to talk with them along the top. In that way, by simply putting a note to myself in a box, I could track which things I needed to bring up with whom.

I was thinking a while back that we could make an overall SE grid with places (parts of the world) along one axis, and topics (areas of interest, expertise, need) along the other, and invite people to log in and “populate” it – then the Social Entrepreneur Index was started, and served some of those functions.

It might be a nice enhancement to be able to grid something here, where in addition to a discussion forum there's a series of topics (for example) along one axis and people who need or have resources or ideas in those areas in the other. Some other dimension (color?) could be used to encode the urgency of the situation, so that people could enter notes in the grid box that corresponds to them; maybe an additional dimension (font, shape) would correspond to something else like distribution, or education, or physical materials.

I have no idea of the feasibility of your idea in terms of software, design etc, but it seems to address the same kind of concern, but from a personal / distributed angle.

As it happens – way above my head – Anthony Judge recently published an account of toroidal grids, suggesting they are superior to matrixes in handling the challenge to richer comprehension and how it needs to match the complexity of policy-making -- especially when different factions prefer to order their understanding of complex systems in different ways If your head for math is clearer than mine – which seems entirely likely – you might be interested to read his comments:

http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/torus.php#from

!!

Warm regards,

Charles

surya prakash.Vinjamuri - Apr 26, 2006 9:03 pm (#27 Total: 132)
Life-Health Reinforcement Group

Checked in to this dialogue at the fag end but I like to place these in front of the group:

• Being small is being big at heart
• Being small is being sure
• Being small allows you to take informed decisions
• Being small says you are serious
• Being small says that you are available
• Being small states that you are accountable
• Being small says you are contended
• Being small says you are prepared to stretch to survive

These are learnings gained through the work we are involved in.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 27, 2006 9:46 am (#28 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Interesting -- thanks for those points, Surya Prakash...

Charles

isbume - Apr 28, 2006 9:03 am (#29 Total: 132)

Dear Pamela, I am very much delighted to know that you are in Nigeria and you are doing a great work.  My name is Segun Benson, a British-trained Nigerian professional with many years of experience in consultancy and training.  I will like to meet with you as I am very much involved in this idea of small business incubation facilities which I developed as a way of achieving an integrated entrepreneurial development in rural areas of Ogun State, Nigeria.  Recently, I presented a paper to the 4th Global Conference on Business and Economics, which took place at the Oxford University, Oxford, England: 26-28th June, 2005.

It is true that there is need for entrepreneurship development, but we need to identify the sector area to be developed in order to achieve sustainability for our youths and unemployed graduates.  I feel that small business incubation concept with solve this problem greatly.  The paper which I presented to the conference is titled: The Dynamics of Small Business Incubation Facilities in Fadama Areas of Ogun State, Nigeria: An Anti-Poverty Device.  If you are interested, I will send a copy to you.

I will like to discuss with you further on how we can network here in Ogun State, Nigeria.  I am the current President of Kings & Priests Network Nigeria (a non-governmental organisation) as well as the President and Head of Missions of the Institute of Small Business Management and Entrepreneurship here in Abeokuta, Ogun State.

I really believe that small is beautiful and the only way we can make it work in the area of entrepreneurship in Nigeria is to focus on high-growth enterprises in the area of agro-industrial development in the rural areas.

Please, let us talk further. 

Meanwhile, remain blessed.

Segun Benson

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - Apr 29, 2006 9:27 am (#30 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Segun:

Thank you so much for your post above -- this is exactly the kind of connection and "mutual aid" that SocialEdge hopes to encourage. I hope that both yourself and Pam will keep us informed as to the results of this contact.

Regards,

Charles

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Marguerite - May 3, 2006 3:31 pm (#39 Total: 132)

Charles, you are correct about change and resistance to it  even though it is really the only constant in our lives. What I feel is that change is so incremental most of the time we don't notice it. However, we have now reached a point where the human family is facing what is described as "a crises unprecedented in human recorded history".  And in order to meet this challenge and survive as the human family, we are going to have to change from a waste-creating society to a sustainable-living society and do it through achieving a quantum leap in consciousness on a worldwide scale.  As Thomas Berry has written: We will go into future as a single sacred community or we will perish in the desert.

What science knows today is that societies and cultures form a "collective consciousness" which may be compared to a group of birds in flight or a hive of bees having "swarm intelligence" and acting as a single coordinated unit through largely "unconscious action".  Thus whole societies or nations may get locked into habit patterns that are a reflective of the "fight or flight" syndrome and not be able to see any other way out. It is in essence "an immature behavior pattern". 

However, by making the invisible visible, or bringing the subconscious into the "now" we can, using a newly acquired trait of the human family, reflexive consciousness, begin to make conscious choices thus releasing ourselves from unhealthy habit patterns of the past and create new pathways of consciousness that lead to healthy lifestyles and a viable future.

For me, this is also about rediscovering who I am in the context of the greater world today. Again, for myself, I find this easier to do within the small rural community in which I currently reside. I've been able to reconnect with the earth as I knew it as a child growing up on a farm. Like so many of us, I had become "dissociated" from reality and The Oneness of Everything as I got caught up in the specialization" and "advanced technology" that appears to have gone beyond what is "appropriate" by any means.  In so-doing, I have learned to treasure the infinite beauty of "smallness".  It is to me the heart and soul of what I consider "home". 

I appreciated very much what surya prakash.wrote about smallness and Pam's response to him.

marguerite ecopilgrim@aabol.com

 

 

 

 

surya prakash.Vinjamuri - May 4, 2006 8:59 am (#40 Total: 132)
Life-Health Reinforcement Group


It was clean addition to the list.

Your points infact enriched me.

I had to go back to socialedge memebership data base to know you.

Good to know that you are open to share.

I feel with my 20 years of close observation of Life, we deffinetly detoriated a lot.

- Failing to understand feelings - Dived real deep into mess - Connected to share the worst situations

All said and done but we came closer to know world is same wherever we are.

I feel we should stop to bluff and share reality.

Pain has to be addressed and pride has to be protected.

Sense of shame has to be infused and thus prove we are HUMAN.

This is possible only if we are small and be available without conditions.

As a statement close to JFK - " Hottest places are reserved for those who remain neutral in testing situations"

Feeling good to know you.

-Surya Prakash,Hyd,A.P.India.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - May 4, 2006 12:16 pm (#41 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


HI Segun --

I can't do that, I'm afraid, but if you go to your user's profile (by clicking on the image that's where you want your photo to go) and then click on the words "edit my profile" the software will allow you to upload it yourself.

Hope to "see" you shortly!..

Marguerite - May 4, 2006 5:27 pm (#42 Total: 132)

Hi Segun, had the time to really read your project complete with attachment. It is very well layed out and reflects your years of expertise.  However, I am wondering as to the target market for your agro-industrial production, and would you also share what is intended as the source of both production and transportation energy?  Of intereest to me also, when I'm looking at "agriculture",  is whether or not you are planning to grow organically?    

marguerite

      

surya prakash.Vinjamuri - May 5, 2006 2:43 am (#43 Total: 132)
Life-Health Reinforcement Group

Please refer to 34 post of mine - Want to miss Life?

There while quoting expressions I wrote-

She is now ripe anyway she is going to fall.

Today the person in the context passed away.

The aged lady is survived by 3 sons and a daughter.

Last son gave her a room with asbestos roof.

Since three months she is not well.

Frankly, none of her children ownwed her.

The slogan underwhich we serve the aged is - Add value to remaining years.

This is done by keeping them in their own homes and provide services at their doorsteps.

Being from medical profession a caution taken is not to medicalise the services.

The entire excercise is done to demonstrate need to take care of the aged by the community  

I am saying all these because - today when she passed away, I saw how real is this - knowing an unknown person and making part of our system and thus feeling loss, is possible only if we are small.

So my conviction is further strengthened being small and being available adds essence to life.

-Surya Prakash.

 

 

 

isbume - May 5, 2006 7:13 am (#44 Total: 132)

Hi, Charles. I have successfully uploaded my pix. Thank you.

Segun

isbume - May 5, 2006 9:25 am (#45 Total: 132)

Hi, Marguerite.  Thank you for taking the time to read through my post and the attachment.  I will be glad to receive your comments on the concept of small business incubation facility discussed in the paper.

Concerning the three issues raised in your post, I am very much pleased to provide the following responses: First, concerning the target market for the agro-industrial production activities of the incubation centre.  This consist of rural farmers, graduate and undergraduate agricultural students and other unemployed individuals interested in agro-industrial enterprises.  These are people interested in converting existing agricultural products into semi-finished products. 

The target market outlets for their products are primarily the local small/medium industrial concerns that are dependent on the products from the incubation centre.  Later the international market will be given consideration in order to generate foreign exchange. 

Secondly, the sources of energy for the production and transportation of the products of the incubatees are electricity, gas and petroleum products.

We are aware that these are now becoming expensive products for the kind of industrialists we are planning to incubate.  In this regard, we are in the process of entering into a partnership with a UK-based Charity organisation that is commencing a project titled "Let There Be Light" for impoverished people in Nigerian villages.  This project will provide low-cost electricity through the solar power system for the beneficiaries of our incubation facilities.  This project is built around the successful village solar cooperative approach in Sri Lanka and will facilitate solar electricity to our small business incubatees.  In this way we hope to expand rural enterprise activities considerably.

On the third point, we believe that growing organically is the only strategic option available for a project like ours.  This is the reason why we are concerned about starting with selected rural communities to establish the sustainability of the project before replicating it in other rural and urban communities in the country.

I will be pleased to hear further from you about what you are doing to strengthen the economic hands of the poor and to make our world better than it was before we were born.

 

Remain blessed.

 

Segun Benson

Marguerite - May 5, 2006 3:52 pm (#46 Total: 132)

Suryah Prakash, your message touched my heart for I am an "old woman" age 74, but on many days, I look and act as if I were 54 -- so I feel age is relative.  It is my intent, if I can honor my committment to be of service to humanity and to remain active, to live another 20 years or more.  I am thankful for the Internet through which we may "travel" and get to know one another, and weave this beautiful tapestry of love and caring worldwide.  Being able to connect in this "small" way within the greater context of the whole of the Internet and World Wide Web is, I feel, a very special thing for us to be able to do. 

And I am in complete agreement with you that we should cease medicalizing people and instead create spaces of peace where people can learn to heal themselves. And people need to be at home with their families, not shunted away in some cold sterile medical facility.  In working to compose the website: "Pathways to Consciousness" one area which has emerged is "the placebo effect" or how our "belief system" influences our "wellness" or "illness".  This, of course has then led into the study of "natural healing practices" as conducted by many indigenous people worldwide.  The statistics of healing from the "placebo effect" are startling when compared to those of allopathic medical practices, and as in many other areas of "supposed" technological advances, there is beginning to emerge doubt as to the efficacy of the treatments in many instances.  That is not to say that allopathic medicine does not have a place in today's world but perhaps on a different level and after efforts at "self-healing" in a warm loving and supportative environment have been exhausted.  But along with Dr. Woolf and another associate, we are focusing on the power of the human mind and its ability to not only heal disease, but its application in the field of disease prevention through what is known as the "relaxation response" among other things. 

But, I do believe these things have to be conducted in the context of sustainable living practices which erase poverty and provide for security within the community so that we can safely and comfortably practice "homecare". Does this make sense?

What are your thoughts on these things, Surya Prakash? I am very much wondering what your "take" on "modernity" as practiced by the Western world is?  Do you feel it has more to offer than what is found in the so-called "developing world"?  

BTW, I have tried to upload a photo and failed.  I have some files that have recently become corrupted and I'm having some dlifficulties I don't know how to resolve.  Will keep working on this.

marguerite

 

 

Marguerite - May 5, 2006 7:30 pm (#47 Total: 132)

Hi Segun,

Nice to get your response.  I am confused as to what the meaning of turning "existing agricultural products into semi-finished products" is. Could you please give some examples of these products? Also, am I to understand that the producers in some instances are also the end users of the products? 

I'm very impressed that in an oil-producing country you are planning to integrate the use of renewable energy into the process. Too bad the U.S. couldn't have been a little more foresighted -- we would not be facing the severe consequences that we are now had our leaders not suppressed initiatives in this field of endeavor. 

Anyway, if international marketing is not productive for you due to an international economic crisis, do you anticipate that local consumption can handle production sufficient to keep the incubation enterprises viable?  I suppose being in an oil-producing country has its advantages with regard to exports into international markets, but a concern might be with where the money will come from to purchase the exports.  I cannot help but feel we have already entered into an enormous worldwide depression that is not readily apparent as yet, but which can only deepen as the oil crisis deepens and global climate change progresses. 

It appears that unless local communities delink themselves from the national economy through creating local currencies, then poverty will only grow worse  as communities "go down with the ship".  Just the disintermediation in the marketplace due to the "churn" as we make the forced change to another fuel source(s) guarantees economic crisis. 

Segun, you wrote in your message: 

I will be pleased to hear further from you about what you are doing to strengthen the economic hands of the poor and to make our world better than it was before we were born.

My response is that other than creating local currencies, I really do not know how to strengthen the economic hands of the poor.  What I do realize is that the driver of our worldwide social system is The Global Monetocracy System which is based in capitalism which requires continual growth to remain in force, so it literally "eats" everything in sight. And in the hands of private enterprise, there are no built in controls with which to manage it. And in a world of finite resources the rapaciousness of this system is devastating.  Perhaps competition by the Euro is the answer -- only time will tell.  However, with the end of oil, we will see the end of "petro dollars" and there is, as yet, no one energy source that can replace the power that oil has given us.  With the end of oil, will control by the elite who have heretofore managed to maintain world control by controlling the majority of the world's wealth disappear? There is a lot up on the "option block" IMHO, which is why I feel so strongly that the people of the world must hold out their hands to one another and unite in a cooperative effort.  Always before we have become divided. It seems to me that now is the time to stand up and say "No more" as world citizens united for peaceful co-existence.   

May you remain blessed as well. 

marguerite

 

 

 

marguerite         

 

 

 

 

surya prakash.Vinjamuri - May 6, 2006 1:04 am (#48 Total: 132)
Life-Health Reinforcement Group


Marguerite & members of social edge,

I like to begin this dialogue by quoting what being said by Martin Luther King: Even If I knew the world would go to pieces , I would still plant my Apple tree.

I see the each of the words described as vices in various scriptures - Bible, Quran, Bhagavat Gita.............. were clearly internalized and practiced,so we ceased to be being Human.

Thus living in immortal world is understood as "Way of Life".

I see while we reflect Life, we also have to spend to understand fact of Life - Death.

In modern living I see scope of access to basics still remain advantage for few because of insecure 'moves'by individuals & institutions.

Life goes on not because of decisions and provisions made by Politicians/Bureaucrats/Buissiness Men or Women,it is because few are able to withstand creulity of Life being unfare and thus taking position to be just.

Ability to withhold history and pass on natural ways of survival is need of the hour.

Being available irrespective of your resourcesfullness is an essential componenet to grow and serve.

Expectations are bound to rise and so also acceptance of reality, thus deffinetly we can set clear agenda of action.

We need to accept limitations and also face failures.

Deffinetly world has become tough and we are getting enough and more feelers to say - stop explaining and just keep doing good work.

Process based approach has very little space but it's the only way we can develop beautiful world.

We believe this and we are doing this and we are enjoying this.

-Surya Prakash,Hyd,A.P.India.

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - May 6, 2006 3:12 pm (#49 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi Segun:

Glad you got your picture uploaded – nice to “see” you here!

Re: Segun Benson's Project

In your post, you mention a project titled "Let There Be Light" for impoverished people in Nigerian villages providing solar-powered low-cost electricity, and say the model for the project is a village solar cooperative approach in Sri Lanka . My thought here is that it might be neat to have a world map here on SE where (in this case) an arrow would connect Sri Lanka to Nigeria, indicating the source and destination of what we might call an act of “conceptual franchising”. Given how important visual impacts can be, I believe that looking at such a map when it has a number of such arrows in place would give great encouragement to others considering the possibility of applying the lessons of one place in another…

Thanks again,

Charles

Charles Cameron aka hipbone - May 6, 2006 3:26 pm (#50 Total: 132)
HipBone Games / Rheingold Associates


Hi Surya Prakash –

Thanks for your post about the woman who was “ripe and ready to fall” – it’s touching to hear of her passing, and I send my condolences to you and to her family and friends. How strange and wonderful that we can be touched this way, across all distances, by each others’ words.

today when she passed away, I saw how real is this

Thank you for including us in this moment of “seeing”.

You quote Martin Luther K