Thoughts, perceptions and learnings from the Skoll World Forum.

Are you attending the Forum?  What have you learned or taken away?  What are your general impressions of the content, networking and overall program?

Share your thoughts here!

Vaserius - Mar 30, 2005 2:13 pm (#1 Total: 13)


The Forum’s first night’s convening has concluded, and I'm not sure I can convey the inspiration I got from hearing these speakers. Each of the stories are so powerful and almost unbelievable - in the sense that one can't believe everyone isn't swept up in the power of doing good because the people of the world deserve it.

The opening ceremony began with the thunderous sound of powerful, traditional Indian drumming echoing through the Said Business Centre. I scurried into the overflow room after connecting with former Social Edge Community Manager, Keely Stevenson. (Be sure to check the index page for updates from Keely and the Social Edge delegates).

Sir Ben Kingsley spoke, as he stated, "intuitively and from the heart." He spoke of his relationship with Jeff Skoll, and Jeff's depth of empathy for those in need. He spoke that if you are fortunate to hear Jeff speak of Social Entrepreneurship and vision for changing the world, you'll think to yourself, "I never heard it that way before. I never saw it that way before."

Charlie Leadbeater then introduced the panel, consisting of Jeff Skoll, Cameron (name-not-caught), Jake Eberts, Peter Samuelson, Jeff Segal and Isabel Maxwell (for information on speakers, click here).

They began by showing a clip from Gandhi that has been dubbed into Arabic. This dubbing is part of a program launched by Jeff and Jake Eberts to show Ghandi to Palestinians. Jeff spoke about dubbing Gandhi into Arabic for the first time, and his hope of teaching non-violence as an plausible alternative for social change.

He also spoke about his dream to write stories of social change. However, he soon realized he did not have the time to do so, but had the time to hire writers and filmmakers. So he started Participant Productions. His vision is to create a long-term, sustainable media company for social good.

His belief is that people are basically good, and if you give them the opportunity to be good, they will. This has proven true even in Hollywood.

For Participant Productions, the movie is the vehicle, but the outcome is social change. Linking social action to the film is the goal, using a model of providing action plans for those who are moved by a picture.

Cameron [name-not-caught], before he began developing the Gandhi in the Camps project, was startled to find out so many people have never heard of Gandhi. “How can we have the conversation about non-violent social change if people don't even know this man?” They are showing the film, in Arabic, in Gaza and West Bank. They hope to reach 1.3 million refugees through thousands of screenings. His hope is that we we will have “a 1000 young Gandhis running around in the world.”

Jake Eberts shared a story of a group setting up a female film makers in Uganda who are given DV cameras to make their own films – tell their own stories. However, the cinematographer is blind, the sound man is deaf and many of the actors are disabled physically or mentally. These women tell stories about how they are mistreated by husbands and male society. They have screenings of these films and 2000 people arrive. Men in the audience, husbands, are so moved, they stand up, often with tears, stating, “if we had been aware of the pain we'd inflicted, we'd have behaved differently.”

This is a way film is changing the world, and not in a Hollywood Studio way..

Peter Samuelson shared that the power of film to show something that doesn't exist in which people can experience and realize that it is good and have a sense of accountability.

Isabel Maxwell believes evaluation is critical. “We must know about those 1000 little Ghandis...” Distribution is the key, she believes, and targeted radio ads would be particularly effective for social change.

Jeff Skoll believes the democratization of media is upon us with technology such as BitTorrent.

Jeff Segal believes the challenge is marketing - how does a filmmaker in Sahara Africa let people know about the film? Putting up the video for download is easy, getting the word out is not.

Isabel believes cheap tools like Google AdSense is a key way for people to get the word out for their projects.

Stan Thekaekara spoke about his role in coordinating tsunami relief. He says people often take the cynical view: People were generous because it was after Christmas, or because Europeans were killed as well, or because the media brought the disaster into our homes.

But, he said, that didn't explain why mosques opened their doors to Muslims, Hindus and Christians alike; why villagers opened their homes to strangers to live as their own families; Why students came in mass, landing on the coast with not much more than a zeal to help.

He also spoke of creating networks of needy communities with producing communities - a new form of "fair trade." “Solutions of yesterday are not the answers of tomorrow,” he said. We must keep up with the changing economic market.

One of the running themes of the night was electronic communication at low or no cost. “The death of distance,” one speaker called it. Peter Samuelson talked about WiMax, a wireless network technology with 40megabits per second and a 30-mile range. This technology will be wide spread in 5 years, he believes.

If we’re on the cusp of the communication technology wonder, why can't I get wireless in my Holiday Inn in Oxford?

For coverage of other speakers, please see the Social Sector Portal.

jimfruchterman - Mar 31, 2005 12:48 am (#2 Total: 13)
Benetech

It's been pretty cool for me, here at the Forum.  As a Skoll grantee, we got to do some exciting pre-Forum stuff.  The first night, we had a dinner in Exeter College.  Apparently, Tolkien studied here as an undergraduate.  The dining hall looked like a smaller version of the Harry Potter Hogwarts set!  I also got the chance to hear Jeff Skoll speak for an hour on why he does what he does, and on what he's doing now.  Pretty exciting to hear about where all this comes from!

The opening of the Forum was last night, and Vaz covered it well.  I got to sit behind Sir Ben Kingsley: imagine sitting within touching distance of an avatar of Gandhi!  Sir Ben described Jeff as a "living Silk Road," invoking the image of the original Silk Road making connections between Asia and Europe and bringing trade and knowledge.  eBay to Participant Productions. 

I'm an engineer, so I don't usually wax eloquent.  But, it was definitely exciting!

I wrapped up the evening with dinner with some of the attendees, and three of the five Skoll Scholars.  Two of them I know well, Keely Stevenson, the mother of the Edge, who many of you have met on-line here and Social Edge.  And, Jesse Fahnestock, who Benetech lost to Oxford.  Our loss, the planet's gain!  It was great to see Jesse and hear about how his social entrepreneurship MBA program is turning out.   

Sohodojo Jim and Timlynn - Mar 31, 2005 5:53 am (#3 Total: 13)
Sohodojo

One of the more difficult aspects of participating in and attending the Forum is the limited time allotted for panel members to share with us what, in some cases, has been a life's work. How do you capture in 10 minutes what you have learned through your many years experience and give Forum attendees a key message to take back home to think about. In many ways each session is like drinking from a fire hose. There are so many good ideas, so many lessons to share. Each day is fully packed from morning to night.  

As we continue to collect information, attend sessions and drink from this fire hose, we will continue to synthesize thoughts and share them with you over the next days and weeks. Don't hesitate to ask questions, share your ideas, open a dialog.

Vaserius - Mar 31, 2005 6:57 am (#4 Total: 13)


Day 2 begins and Sally Osberg, CEO of Skoll Foundation, opens the day’s proceedings speaking about the connections being made – the neurosignals being sent out, the synapses being created.

She speaks of how the Skoll Foundation was created to systemically reduce the gap between the haves and have nots, based on Jeff Skoll’s vision to demonstrate that this change is possible.

"Our charge is to 'charge the network'. That's why we're here," she said. "Reach out and learn from each other. As E.M. Forster said, '...only connect'."

[Unfortunately, I missed Mark Moore’s talk and I hope one of the delegates captured his thoughts.]

The next panel began, chaired by Steve Woolgar, on framing social venture networks to achieve success. The panels thoughts, to the best of my ability to capture them, follow:

Mark Ventresca

Thinking with networks changes how you think and what you think you can do. Networks help envisioning kinds of realities and help to put together the relationships to make those realities real.

Social Networks can be used as a research tool as a different way to crack difficult problems of change. These are the shared images of the connectedness of the world.

What kinds of academic network study?

- Social networks track direct and indirect ties among nodes in the network, via "pipes". - Actor Networks Theories (ANT) views social action in a distributed ecology of actors and other element (actants). There is a de-emphasis on unitary or "natural" actors. It tracks how these linkages embed and stabilize technologies and markets.

He shared the IDEO (a California design firm) idea of "Nothing invented here", and how they use information from diverse sources to create novel, combinations of ideas.

What links do we act on in the social network? We focus on relationships between actors rather than attributes. We are already connected, we need to manage those connections. Need to think about the patterns of these connections. How do we make new relationships or manage old ones?

Social Networks play key roles in moving inventions to innovations.

Sarah Wortmore

What makes networks successful? Significance of being "more than human" makes them work.

Think about the elements that are mobilized, but also the activities, the technologies, the devices and codes essential to allow things to circulate and allow networks to be stable.

Networks are never just made by connections of people, but of relationships among the greater world of the network.

Alternate Food Networks create realignments that bring strange coalitions between consumers and farmers. These networks flourish in Europe in the face of terrible food scarcities.

An example of network that tried to get itself going is the RSPCA. They created a label: “Freedom Food RSPCA Monitored” and the practice of Alternate Food Networks to get the word out as a marketing process. When you act as an envoy of network, you are also an envoy of trust.

Producers or consumers could be anywhere in the world. The network allows consumers to check into conditions of whatever they're buying without having access to the actual data. A second dimension is the certification process which makes the logo mean something and creates consistency so the label means the same thing no matter where you find it. That's what makes the network work over time and space.

Networks aren't just people - they are all aspects of the ecosystem, including the animals, the logos, the data, etc.

Karen Stevenson

At the beginning of her talk, Karen claimed to have negative technology karma, which manifested itself in her power point not working properly. Sally Osberg to the rescue! She fixed the power point and got the presentoion going. Way to go Sally!

Rates of exchange: Arch types: Transactions, Authority, Trust. Disintersted, non-repetitive, routinized by an authority, mutual trust relationship

The organizational form of a network consists of trust networks, market transactions authority firm (a triangle).

The atomic center of a functioning network is the Hub, Gatekeeper and Pulsetaker, the three measures of centrality. If you know where they are in a network, you can give them information to feed/grow network or destroy the network by removing it.

To effect cultural or sustainable change, the entry point is through trusted networks. You can take the foundation of the network and seed it somewhere else to build another network.

We need to monitize measuring trust. The reason we want to measure is so we can talk about culture and have hard measures for it.

Need to add heterarchy to network model. Need to look at how networks are imbedded in other networks, where organizational authorities overlap each other. How does transaction authority and trust work in a heterarchy?

When everyone is doing there job, even with same idea or value, can still have perverse outcome. If you want to get people aligned, their organizations must be collaborative.

The change we create must be sustainable change.

Alex Nicholls

Social network approach: New ways of thinking to new ways of action.

Fair Trade Marketing and new marketing approaches.

Social exchange theory is that of connectedness of exchange relationships.

Actor Network Theory (ANT) is simultaneously an actor whose activity is networking heterogeneous elements and a network that is able to redefine and transform what it is made of (Callon 1986). This is a snapshot, because these networks are changing all the time. The emphasis is on process, not structure.

Mediators of networks are both human and non-human agents that sustain a web of connection over greater distances and are mobilized in the performance of social networks whose significance is increased.

Fair Trade Marketing Network Example:

- Information flows/embedded information (consumer must believe it is doing good) - Network is emergent and contingent - Strengthening through mediators - Mode of ordering: Connectivity

Marketing messages shorten distances and bring producers closer to the consumer

3 phases of fair trade marketing:

- Focus on producer (imagery to connect with producer) - Focus on quality/benefits (glossy imagery of product) - Focus on civic engagement (fair trade towns and entities)

Certification provides trust and the network allows flow of info back and forth between producer and consumers. Product information is distributed and civic engagement becomes important.

Fair Trade marketing can increase its impact by using ANT to identify new marketing strategies. Analysis may help capture full range of impacts of a social venture and ANT analysis may thus reveal new resource opportunities.

The floor was then opened to questions:

What about disenchanted networks?

ANT can be powerful not only for good, but for evil (terrorist networks). The power of networks is great either way. That's why we have to understand the atomic theory of networks so we can take action when needed. Network is a tool to understand diasporic movements. ANT lets us move beyond normal classification (race, nationality, etc.) and focus only on the actual connections and we can then understand how people are using the network.

What about the nanticipated outcome results from networking?

One of the challenges of these measurements are to capture positive and negative outcomes. In fair trade, often coops, these market forces can be captured by this kind of thinking.

What are the prospects of new technology facilitating growth?

Because of the speed of tech growth, we need to move beyond networks solely and looking at heterarchy. Massive potential for these technologies that are not utilized and resources are wasted.

Measuring Trust

If you can measure it, quantify it, and exercise indication, you can produce a line of behavior. The perverse outcomes happen because networks aren't inline. Social Capital is a new growth measure. Need to communicate not only social value but measurable, quantifiable value. Need to be careful between what we're studying and what trust is made of, as practiced in the world. Need to keep that in mind, and need to look into "trustworthiness".

Theoretical to practical - how do we take action through these networks - how do you begin to build a network around distributing cameras for rights?

Understand what the current infrastructure is, and either work with it or change it. Get to know other organizations: people who distribute cameras; other human rights people; etc. Find out who you can trust - people who know you and you can trust. Go through existing relations. Leverage relationships of people you know. Social Network answer t getting the tools/resources you need is to go through the people you already know.

Vaserius - Mar 31, 2005 10:08 am (#5 Total: 13)


The discussion was chaired by Geraldine Peacock, Chair, Charity Commission.

It is an important time for this discussion, she said. We’re on the cusp of new charity legislation and a new definition of the government and the "beyond profit" sector.

"The sector is going from cap in hand to cap on head. Why are we always looking to other people to invest in us? Why do we not have the courage to change the agenda?"

The panelists spoke, and their comments are captured below, as well as I could manage:

Ron Culley, CEO Scottish Enterprise Glasgow

Ron spoke about the strides in development his company made in Glasgow. His emphasis was on collaboration with city officials and authority.

They needed to regenerate the economy of south of Glasgow due to decline of ship building and other commercial endeavors. From 1982 to 1997, the economy was developed to such a good state that it was rated "an area of opportunity." The key was partnership and collaboration.

Glasgow is now the second largest economy after London, despite a culture of violence such that the doctors there are considered experts in treating knife wounds.

Ron was told by officials that "public policy is none of your business." But, as he observed, there is no Department of Poverty, or Department of Street Prostitution, or Department of Violent Crime Reduction. Because of that, partnership with community and authority is essential in solving these issues.

To start a business in Glasgow, it used to take 17 different permits. "Can you imagine how intimidating that is to someone who wants to start a business?" Through collaboration with city officials, Ron's company reduced it to 1. They built a joint economic strategy in Glasgow, where everyone is held to account, and thus reduces the number of disparate strategies being created.

The authorities (constables, developers, officials) now have an affable relationship, which makes collaboration easier. It took years to cultivate this relationship, but the results speak for themselves: Partnership yields better results and it's easier in the absence of clutter.

Cheryl Kernot, Consultant

Cheryl spoke about the jobless situation (what we would call job placement and welfare in the U.S.), and I’m afraid my American-centric brain was not able to follow it completely. I apologize if my summary seems disjointed or I distort the facts.

In Australia, they have created a job placement program in which the needy are provided a 13-week guaranteed job. But is a 13-week position useful and sustainable?

The governmental program for providing for the need is suffering Mission Drift. In Australia, you can lose your benefits completely for things like missing an interviews. Australia seems to be a large distance away from a logical system that provides service to those in need.

One issue is the reluctance of those running social programs to criticize government because of fear of losing funding.

However, in England’s Blair’s government has done well creating programs for startup social enterprises - there's an enabling environment for social enterprise. However, the down side is the enormous amount of risk management studies necessary, the multiple forms, the measurements, etc. This type of environment stifles innovation which is supposedly what social enterprise is about. Unfortunately, that environment is mirrored by many funders.

More support, capacity earning, more incubator space, money for training and capacity building, local authority procurement and purchasing can be used more effectively. Local authorities can be more pro-active in identifying growth sectors for social enterprise.

The sector needs to gather more data to justify the money spent for the outcomes achieved. Eventually, when these enterprises are proven, they can move to commercial loans instead of grants.

Social enterprise is a legitimate subset of enterprise. We need to be telling the story, creating the space and challenging the notion that doing business this way is different or inferior. We need a peaceful revolution; challenge the way our effectiveness is measured. The governments need to give priority to social enterprises and support these organizations.

Mark Moore, Director, Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

Crime and public sector management. Both criminals and public managers both use force and other people's money to produce results.

SEs are often dependant on govt for success.

The beginning of the process is not becoming a 501c3. The beginning is the first amendment. The freedom to speak and act.

Differnece bet tax exemption and appropration Tax exemption is a hidden subsidy from the govt. This is important because the founder gets to decide how the money is spent. If govt give money directly, it's the collective deciding how the money is spent.

Difference between contract and grant grant means I trust you and your cause. a contract means I'm dubious of your qualifications so I condition the money with terms.

Govt contracts are not support - they're exploitive. get as much value as you can from orginzation and giving money out of empathy, you're violating your fiduciary responsibillity.

Orgs are dependant on demand-side (medicare)

Polically important to protect first amendment and allow NPs to do their job.

Kate Annison, Economic Inclusion Policy Manager, SEEDA www.seeda.co.uk

Kate spoke about the need for encouraging public sector (public servant in the U.S.) engagement with social enterprise and social entrepreneurship

The Southeast UK is the least developed part of UK, social enterprise-wise.

So where are we going in the public sector? Government policy focuses on the buzz words and theories of social entrepreneurship without unpacking the meaning.

She then shared a cartoon of a chicken with the caption, "We can all fly as high as the dreams we dare to live. Unless we are a chicken." The public sector often feels like that chikcin.

Why do people have the impression that we do anything right in the public sector? There are people who have passion for social change and work in public sector. When she moved into public service, she went from being a social enterprise hero to a social enterprise pariah. Unfortunately, people who work in public center are not even validated by their own organization. It is very important to validate people working in public sector as valuable to social entrepreneurship.

Now there is a cultural shift in Southeast UK: Cultural misunderstanding and exclusive behaviors breed disengagement and systemic barriers. We need to bring together multi-stakeholders to one pot of money to use as decided.

The General principals of cultural shift:

- Broad perspective encouraged - Widespread participation in change - Truthful assessment encouraged - -Non one size fits all solutions - Make advantages clear - -Diverging values understood by all - Work out difficulties rather than blame

Questions and comments from the audience

It's interesting to see people who used to write articles against SE are now supporters. Need to refine our idea of what governments are. When a corporation lands a govt. contract to build a prison or hospital, the stock goes up. When an SE gets a contract or award, it's seen as a handout. This needs to change.

In Scotland, the state is so involved in social enterprise, people feel trapped and feel as a downstream, low cost provider. How do we break out of this and invest our own money where we want? People who get grants in Scotland are remarkably constrained. Public sector doesn't understand the value they bring to the negotiation table. They accept prices too low. "Profit" is not a dirty word, it's what you do with it. Would like to see more choice in where taxpayer dollars go. What about charities? They've been excluded from the conversation. You can make any business into a social business. Don't limit yourself to public sector vs. private sector.

In German, it's Partnershaft, and it often feels like this. If we want to accept going to market, we have to accept death and we're not willing to accept that.

In the south (India) the government is so powerful, there is no room for civil society to negotiate. There was a shift in the government to give money to small grassroots groups. Today, there is a partnership with government, a "four 'P'" partnership: Public, Private, People’s Partnership. Often the people are marginalized. Partnership has to be based on respect, diversity, transparency and accountability. Don't expect people to always be on the receiving end - they want to be on the policy-making end as well.

In one man's country, there are 150 million people and not even 500 public toilets. When they started a movement to create the public toilets, the government saw them as a money-making organization, so the government taxes them so much, they have to move from state to state. How do we balance these issues?

How did the UK setup a SE division (DTI)? High ideals, mutualization of welfare state. Participatory government is the best way of delivery, but it is still enmeshed in market values.

In summation, Geraldine Peacock stated that we need to redefine public benefit. The public needs to decide what it is and how we want it delivered. It's about rewriting the rules of engagement between public and state. Unless you do that, you don't know what it is you can achieve. The government today is resetting the framework in which these things are carried out. The way we live is what this is about, and profit is the name of the game - money and resources you can reinvest for the public good, not necessarily for share holders.

jimfruchterman - Apr 1, 2005 3:25 am (#6 Total: 13)
Benetech

I just wanted to say how cool it was last night at the awards ceremony.  We got to see a pre-release screening of a clip from the New Heroes PBS program: it featured someone fighting debt bondage in India and connected it to Rugmark, one of the Skoll awardees.  The actual ceremony was presided over by Sir Ben Kingsley, Sally Osberg and Jeff Skoll.  It was so cool to hear Sir Ben read off the story of each of the ten social entrepreneurs who were being honored. 

And afterwards, we ate and drank until the wee hours of the morning.  We're not called social entrepreneurs for nothing!!

Michael Chertok - Apr 1, 2005 7:02 am (#7 Total: 13)

There were many highlights for me during the past couple days; certainly the Awards Ceremony on Thursday evening was inspiring.

However, one of the most transformative ideas for me came during the 'Think Like a Funder' panel on Thursday afternoon.  When asked about the future for social entrepreneurs, John Kingston of Venturesome speculated than in 10 years there might be a shift in the market power from the supply side to the demand side. 

Just imagine...a time when funder of social entrepreneurs would be chasing deals...and social entrepreneurs would be asking, 'what is the right *kind* of money?' 

Now that's an exciting prospect!John pointed out how this has happened for consumer financing.  And it was almost like that in the venture capital world for a while.  With intergenerational transfers of wealth...and the growing momentum for social entrepreneurship, it really could happen.

C Kirabo - Apr 1, 2005 7:28 am (#8 Total: 13)
Webbed Strategist, Life in Africa Foundation

Now that it's over, I feel like we can really begin. The amount of information packed into the past couple of days has been overwhelming. In fact, I'd say that's one of my general comments about the content - too much, in too little time.

Our sector offers such richness and diversity of experience, and yet there wasn't enough time to really go into depth on any issues. With only 10 minutes for each presenter, and panels of up to 7 people, my sense is that the audience's appetites were whetted, but few were really satisfied. Certainly my own wish would have been to be able to hear every speaker and learn more about the particular challenges, constraints and successes they have achieved within the context of their social entrepreneurial journeys.

As for the people I've met, well, what can be said other than positive on that front. Social entrepreneurs are such a warm and exciting group. And no matter how senior or junior in experience or professional recognition, everyone was very open, engaging and INTERESTING to talk to.

But now the work for which the wonderful Sohodojo pair and I came here to do can begin in earnest. It's time to distill, package and deliver the most interesting of what we've found here, and that we shall begin to do after a pint or two :)

Aikidosphere - Apr 5, 2005 3:42 pm (#9 Total: 13)
introduced concept of Integrated (Aikido) Entrepreneurship

I understand that at the Skoll World Forum (and also elsewhere) some are occasionally suggesting something like - "there will be a day when the majority of businesses are socially responsible" - i.e. that consciously responsible business behavior will become the rule rather than the exception*.  This mainstreaming of stewardship theme strikes me as key in the entire dialogue. 

*I deal with the inevitability of mainstreaming stewardship (and also a path to that point) in a draft essay on integrated entrepreneurship that I've circulated privately (it is not sound bite stuff, but about the healthfulness of polyculturalization ... unfortunately sound-bites tend to be monocultural ... fortunately, some of those I've sent it to have suggested publishing it or a shorter variant in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, and one has suggested posting it on Social Edge ... but where? ... well I see an attachment window below, so i'll try that)

Attachments:

Integrated (Aikido) Entrepreneurship Mar 4 2005 v8.doc (452 KB)

subliminaldirections - Apr 8, 2005 2:06 am (#10 Total: 13)
Social Enterprise or Lies

Had a excellent time at the forum, most of what I heard is what we here at Subliminal Directions think and believe concerning media in the community, local, national and now we see global we praise you all.

I hope we can now start the community media revolution globally, the power of networking should not be lost anymore, we must have positive action. I don't know about everyone-else but I'm fed-up with people giving out non action support and not being able to communicate with the ones who matter. Why do people with power never speak to the common man? is it because they think we will ask for money. Drive with passion not the pound or the dollar..

kind regards mark

www.subliminaldirections.org.uk

C Kirabo - Apr 8, 2005 3:32 am (#11 Total: 13)
Webbed Strategist, Life in Africa Foundation


Hello aikidosphere -

I've been singing the inevitability tune for a long time - it's nice to know we are becoming a chorus. I'll look forward to reading the article you've attached.

Meanwhwile, you can check out a wrap up on the Forum discussions about the direction of the Citizen's Sector at large which partially answers your question here: C Kirabo, "The global social change movement - whence, where and whither?" #1, 30 Mar 2005 11:20 pm

There were other discussions and trends apparent that I am still working on.

C

C Kirabo - May 14, 2005 7:31 am (#12 Total: 13)
Webbed Strategist, Life in Africa Foundation

John Sayer of Africa Now has posted some very interesting reflections on SWF 2005 here:  jsayer, "Skoll World Forum: Some contrarian comments" #1, 29 Apr 2005 2:09 am

I'm reposting some of what he wrote here, in the hopes that others will chime in with more thoughts now that time gives us the benefit of perspective.

There was more emphasis this year on the individual, with much focus on and accolades for ‘outstanding individuals,’ ‘visionaries’  and ‘outstanding leaders.’ The awards reinforced this. While individual initiative is an important component of change, the focus of the conference – networks and movements – depends very much on cooperation among people, collective action, and team work. There was little mention of the hard work of many within organizations, or the fact that great ideas are often built by the many who add complementary talents to the mix. Great thinkers are not always great leaders, and the meek have insights where the forceful see none. While there are many leaders who deserve praise, we all know the organizational hazard of  ‘founders syndrome’ wherein individual, often charismatic, leaders begin to believe their own publicity.

C Kirabo - May 16, 2005 4:54 am (#13 Total: 13)
Webbed Strategist, Life in Africa Foundation

The energy and dust have settled, the Skoll World Forum 2005 was a success in many ways, and now it's time to think ahead to next year.  Whether you attended the 2005 Forum or not, the Skoll Foundation would like to hear from Social Edge members on what you'd like to see next time.

I'm told the theme for 2006 will be Funding Social Entrepreneurship. Obviously, this is a juicy topic, but it's also a potentially vast one (meaning, it deserves a separate thread). Please make your suggestions about what you'd like to see presented at C Kirabo, "Planning for SWF 2006 - "Funding Social Entrepreneurship"" #, 16 May 2005 4:50 am

If you did attend the Forum, the Skoll Foundation would also like to hear from you about any organizational aspects you experienced in 2005, which should be improved upon.

I, for one, would like to see more effort put into ensuring that this WORLD forum has global representation. There were far too few southern faces & perspectives present. I also think I'd rather have had more time to listen to and ask questions of fewer presenters. At the 2005 Forum, there was too little time allowed for meaningful learning-oriented dialogue with the presenters, and due to what I think was simply an overloaded schedule, the "question brokering" system didn't seem to work very well.

Anyone else with thoughts about what can be improved for next year?