, ,

Ag Faceoff: For-profit or Nonprofit, Which Wins the Social ROI Contest?

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

Mark Brown, rx Co-Founder of Kulemela Investments and Current Oxford Said MBA student weighs in on “Ag Faceoff: For Profit or Non-profit Which Wins the Social ROI Contest.”

Agriculture presents an incredible opportunity for small-scale rural families in developing countries across the world. Countless organizations have taken various approaches in an effort to help farming families create better livelihoods for themselves. In this debate, link we heard from two representatives from non-profits and two representatives from a for-profit investment fund. They debated which structure better positions an organization to achieve social return on investment.

The panel, moderated by Richard Fahey, COO of the Skoll Foundation, included Alan Cheung and Ion Yadigaroglu of the for-profit Capricorn Investment Group, and their non-profit counterparts Willy Foote of Root Capital and Andrew Youn of One Acre Fund.

The panel was tasked to debate whether $1million can generate better social impact for small scale farmers if invested in a for-profit company or donated through a non-profit channel.

All four of the panelists shared great examples of investments and impact that their respective organizations have made and achieved. All four debaters expressed their organizations’ innovative approaches, promising social impact and the ability to generate healthy streams of revenue. At the end of the introductory remarks all of the panelists seemed to have a lot in common.

Alan Cheng pointed out that Root Capital and One Acre fund have a lot in common with for-profit ventures. Willy Foote urged us to consider that non-profits can make riskier, important investments. Ion Yadigaroglu pointed out that many of the early discoveries that have been scaled by non-profits were initially discovered by for-profit ventures. Andrew Youn shared his bottom line that One Acre is for-impact and with a non-profit baseline, it can formulate its approach to generate social impact at the most efficient rate.

The panelists raised compelling arguments but their values did not seem to be inherently opposed. The dialogue pushed the conversation past the two sides’ common threads of impact and financial sustainability and examined where they are unique from one another: in their differing accountability to their sources financing. Fortunately Jeff Skoll, an investor in all four of the panelists organizations, stepped forward to share his perspective. “It’s about timing”, he shared from the gallery. Market forces can achieve great impact, but when working to serve the poorest of the poor, the timeline to make money can just take too long. With less vulnerable populations, we can let market forces push businesses forward to create social impact.

The insights from each side of the debate seemed to underscore the importance and benefits that both for-profits and non-profits can have in the pursuit of improving small-scale farmer livelihoods. In the end the themes of a commitment to social impact, innovative methods and financially-sustainable revenue prevailed as more important than what seemed to be a false tension between non-profit and for-profit structures.

Follow Mark: @MarkPatBrown

, , ,

Stronger Together? Government Collaboration with Social Enterprises in India

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student, viagra 100mg Skoll Scholar and Founder of Home Safe, ampoule Nikhil Saigal gives his perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Stronger Together? Government Collaboration with Social Enterprises in India’.

The question of the necessity and possibilities of fostering collaboration between the public and civic sector has been a pertinent one amongst practitioners. When champions from both sectors come together on a common platform, the insights are bound to be powerful.

Natalia Agapitova, Program Lead, Innovation Labs at World Bank kicked us off with her experiences working with multiple social enterprises across the developing world. Seeing a strong synergy in the objectives that both the civil sector and public stakeholders are working towards, she stressed the need to create an environment where support systems can help these social enterprises scale the work they do.

Rwitwika Bhattacharya, CEO for Swaniti Initiative, has been working in the space of delivering development solutions to government officials in India. These solutions have ranged across the fields of healthcare, education, gender equality and livelihoods. Sharing her experiences on working with a government in a rapidly developing environment, she explains that most often the challenges arise out of a difference in perceptions of the problem. While local government officials feel extremely connected first hand to issues in their areas, organizations that have seen successes in other settings are not always perceived to be able to tackle it and may be seen as outsiders. Suggesting that the best approach is to build a track record and show results in a similar environment visavis geography or nature of the challenge, strongly helps push the cause through.

On the flipside, hearing from Ms Vidyavathi Vaidyanathan, Joint Secretary at the Government of India, gave a balanced view of how the public stakeholders view collaboration opportunities with social enterprises. Over her 25 years working with the Indian political system across levels ranging from the Zila Panchayat all the way to her current role as joint secretary, one sentiment that came out strongly throughout was her insight that the perception from governments is changing. While there was a time that for profit organizations were perceived as negative partners, she says “Profit is not a dirty word”, matching Ritwika’s insight on how the transparent profit motive gives the government a clear understanding of what’s in it for the partner.

While times are changing and an environment of greater openness to working together are seemingly closer, we still have a long way to go before these conversations are more common. In the experiences shared, we could see how governments are open to overcoming traditional challenges like partnerships being driven on the basis of individual motivations and changes in this by bringing about longer term, multi year agreements on solutions being delivered. We are also seeing changes in the push for collaboration coming from both sides of the equation, governments reaching out to look for partners combined with the more traditional route of social enterprises advocating the government to open up to partnerships.

In my experience of working on Road Safety in India, there are certain social issues where collaboration with public stakeholders – governments and law enforcement agencies, becomes imperative to see a change. A for profit start up, we faced multiple challenges engaging with the public sector and understanding how these challenges are being addressed by other organizations working with the government. Armed with strong insights and experiences of practitioners in India on successes and challenges on fostering government collaboration, these experiences allow us to evolve our approach to taking the social missions we are passionate about to fruition.

Follow Nikhil: @nikhilsaigal

, , ,

Mindful Action, Intelligent Fearlessness: Creating Movements that Inform, Inspire, and Change the World

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student and Skoll Scholar, recipe Maria Springer gives her perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Mindful Action, Intelligent Fearlessness: Creating Movements that Inform, Inspire, and Change the World’.

Panel moderator Ron Schultz, Co-Founder of Waterman Aylsworth, opened the early morning session with a request for the audience: “Please root your feet on the floor, place your hands on your knees, sit up straight, gently lower your gaze, and feel your heart. Then let your heart radiate out.”

Within sixty seconds, the hearts of 75 delegates were radiating. If we believe that individuals are connected to the universe and by default other individuals, building movements that inform, inspire and change the world require mindfulness and fearlessness. Radiating hearts are just the beginning. Three key insights on mindful action and intelligent fearlessness emerged from the session.

(1) Fear is workable. What if we see fear as workable? After all, even the fearless fear. Insight Meditation Society co-founder, Sharon Salzberg, suggests that if we “loosen the grip on fixed thinking and expectations, new options emerge.” Fears that are acknowledged can be turned around. By creating space and an internal practice for managing fear, we can accept the world as it is, not how we think it ought to be, savings us time, frustration and energy. Founder and CEO of International Bridges to Justice, Karen Tse, summed up the point with a quote from Khalil Gibran, “your joy is your sorrow unmasked.”

(2) Compassion is a practice. Practicing compassion enables social entrepreneurs to align intention with heartfelt, powerful action. APOPO Founder, Bart Weetjens, suggests that social entrepreneurs are often successful because they demonstrate compassion for themselves and for those they serve. Social entrepreneurs who love themselves authentically connect with those they serve.

(3) Boldness and compassion are not mutually exclusive. Fierce compassion does not make one weak or foolish, and the notion of being compassionate towards oneself is not to be confused with laziness, a lack of rigor or an inability to pursue excellence. On the contrary, “being compassionate can increase the audacity and intensity of action,” advises Salzberg. By practicing fierce compassion, social entrepreneurs create the space to avoid superficial reactions, and can instead respond intelligently and strategically.

Mindful action, fierce compassion and intelligent fearlessness require practice and commitment. By valuing mindfulness, compassion and fearlessness, social entrepreneurs can inform, inspire and change the world.

 

Follow Maria: @mariaspringer

, , ,

Healthcare as an Engine for Social Transformation

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student and Skoll Scholar, discount Ritesh Singhania gives his perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Healthcare as an Engine for Social Transformation’.

Ritiesh - Healthcare

Is healthcare about disease management or delivering health?

While it is so important to provide quality affordable healthcare to communities at the bottom of the pyramid, can healthcare alone improve the lives of the people?

This is how we began the session with Gary Cohen, co-founder Healthcare Without Harm; Tyler Norris, VP Total Health, and Rebecca Onie, Co-founder Health Leads. It was very thought provoking to start the session broad, with questions that make us challenge our own thinking about the fundamental role that healthcare can play in the lives of local communities.

It is difficult to set up a medical clinic in the middle of a village community in rural India and expect the community to grow. Illness treatment or disease management in segregation can only have a limited impact in the lives of the people. To give an example – most of the women in rural India still use firewood for their cooking energy needs, leading to massive amounts of smoke within the four walls. This smoke is inhaled by just not the women of the family, but also by their children. As Annie Griffiths, from Ripple Effect Images highlighted during her fantastic opening plenary at the Skoll World Forum, that more children (under the age of five) die due to breathing problems, than diarrhoea, dengue and pneumonia together. Thus, while setting up a medical clinic in a remote village definitely has value addition for the community, it is important to understand the needs of the community and set up a cross-sectoral relationships with other areas of development for a healthier life-style of people.

I would like to share a small example from my days back in India, where we used to set up small scale power plants in the Indian Himalayas to generate clean electricity and cooking charcoal (by-product) from flammable pine needles. We would employ local women in the villages to collect pine needles and remunerate them both in the form of cash and cooking charcoal. Women in the villages are normally responsible to meet the energy needs of the family and spend the entire day gathering firewood. By employing them to collect pine needles, for the first time we were not only empowering them with money, but also offering a cleaner source of cooking fuel so that they do not have to go but down trees, in the fragile Himalayan eco-system. Thus, trying to create an impact at every step in the value chain by not only offering cleaner electricity to people, but also a cleaner cooking fuel and employment.

Similarly, healthcare offerings in the local communities have to be integrated with the needs of the community so that we can actually see a difference in the lives of the people – better, healthier people for a brighter future.

Follow Ritesh: @riteshs01

,

Trust and Accountability in the Digital Age

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

History of Art & Visual Culture MSt student, shop Nirmalie Mulloli gives her perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Trust and Accountability in the Digital Age’.

Data. The gold dust which shows your innovation worked. The lifeblood of an organisation. Yet also the reason a 35-year-old NGO was closed down after information of its financial activity was accessed by the local mafia who subsequently demanded monthly payments, ambulance and the way the Nazi military identified Jewish citizens until the Census building was burnt down by activists. These were all examples raised under the topic of accountability and the management of data with the distinguished panel comprising: Melanie Edwards, Mobile Metrix, Founder & CEO; Toby Norman, Simprints, CEO; Juliana Rotich, BRCK.org, Executive Director and Mariarosaria Taddeo,  associate co-investigator, PETRAS hub for internet of things, moderated by Alexsis de Raadt St. James, The Althea Foundation, Founder & Chairman.

Needless to say, there is unfortunately no ‘one-size-fits-all’ model when it comes to the management of data. What did begin to emerge from the discussion in the context of the responsibilities of social enterprises or non-profits is a need to design and implement an explicit end-to-end data management strategy and policies with enhanced built-in levels of accountability.  Juliana Rotich fleshed this point out particularly well, as she expressed how accountability is not just about response but also about setting built-in mandates of accountability from the outset. This translates for example to strategies and policies to encrypt data as it is being collected, to building accountability into the impact design; Rotich provided an example of a municipality in Dublin, Ireland which adopted an open source platform called fixmystreet.com which enabled residents to report any issues with council services such as the bins not being emptied or pot holes in the road. Whilst other councils have also adopted the platform, what made the municipality in Dublin different was that they established a mandate for the city council to respond to any issues reported within 48 hours. This step built into the design of the platform a level of accountability through feedback loops which enabled trust in the platform to be developed.

Conversely, it was discussed that a strategy for what happens to the data once the project is completed should be established and made explicit. This, as counterintuitive as is may seem, means planning for the destruction of the data which you plan collect before you’ve even started collecting. This could be a simple as deciding to store the data for one or two years once it has been collected before it is destroyed. Designing an end-to-end strategy for the data builds necessary levels of accountability into the architectural design of the work. Furthermore, ensuring these safeguards are in place is of course also the responsibility of actors who themselves do not collect data but work with organisations which do.

The discussion evolved from this point into thinking about the transparency of the policies and how accessible they are to the people subscribing or participating.  I’m certainly guilty of not reading the pages and pages of small print when an agreement to a privacy statement is requested. To this issue Alexsis de Raadt St. James suggested that perhaps a truncation of the three basic tenants of privacy policy, expressing the intent to collect data, whether data can be shared and how long it will be kept for should be available and visible or explicit before any activity is undertaken. This it seems is a topical issue within the non-profit sector; de Raadt St James carried out a survey of the non-profit sector to investigate the levels of privacy policies, if they had one and when if they did, when they had last reviewed it. Only 30% of the non-profits she engaged had a privacy policy and those which did had not reviewed it since they had been formed. Certainly, social enterprises and non-profits have a responsibility to protect the data they are collecting and in order to address both the moral and more practical pitfalls more robust and explicit steps towards building accountability into the architecture of the work needs to be conceived.

Overall, the speakers and moderator certainly touched all the bases of the overarching complexities of the issues around data and accountability from the moral considerations to the practical. However, just as the discussion was reaching the juicier nitty gritty the session ended and I feel perhaps the take away could have been richer if the discussion time or the session time itself was extended.

Follow Nirlmalie: @nirmaliemulloli

,

The Neuroscience of Fierce Compassion

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Oxford University Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

Ellen K gives her perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘The Neuroscience of Fierce Compassion’.

Some suggest that compassion is the thing that makes us human and thrive as a species.   Melina Uncapher Assistant Professor of Neurology, cialis University of California at San Francisco; CEO and Co-Founder, Institute for Applied Neuroscience, served as our travel guide in a trip through the compassion in the brain.   We actually looked inside Physician Dr. Larry Brilliant’s amazing brain via fMRI technology and visualization.  In fact, through this spectacular technology, those being studied are able to look into their own minds as well!   We talked about various systems and circuits and networks that support our human ability to express compassion and empathy.

We then met two additional researchers:  Jamil Zaki Assistant Professor of Psychology, Stanford University, who provided his definitions of empathy in terms of experience sharing, perspective taking, and motivation. He discussed “feeling” someone else’s pain and seeing activation in various parts of the brain.   He also talked about how people with autism also show emotional empathy.  He walked us through the way that researchers use fMRI technology to study how emotional empathy is studied. He asked the question: How do we allocate or take control of our empathy?  In his research he found that people who believe they can grow their empathy, are more willing to learn how to empathize better and he questioned whether limits on empathy have to be there.

We also were introduced to Dr. Adam Waytz Associate Professor of Management and Organizations, Kellogg School of Management spoke on the limits on empathy and perspective taking.   He believes that compassion is the answer, but he suggests our capacity for cognitive empathy or perspective taking may be limited by our ability to put ourselves in another person’s shoes and our ability to remember.  He says that the more empathy that we spend on one person, the less that we can spend on another.   We can also have limits of empathy or what amounts to compassion fatigue.  In other words, social entrepreneurs, care givers, etc. can be fatigued after a day of attending to the needs of others, and can be physically fatigued or feel emotional depletion.  In the question and answer section, he also talked about the importance of hearing the human voice in activating our emotions and that sometimes technology communications without the voice can strip this out.   And, he talked about the difficulty of getting into the mind of another person and the difficulty of being able to perceive things as another person does as a challenge that we often face.

Taddy Blecher CEO, Community and Individual Development Association, is a social entrepreneur who is working with youth in South Africa to take children out of poverty and to help children build their self-esteem, self-development, and to show them that they are loved.  He demonstrates through the educational programmes that he provides to children — that compassion, love, caring, and feelings and the self are so vital to the education system.  And, he underlined that we must develop our brain not just along one line, but to develop our thinking about the whole person.  He also believes that compassion, caring, love and feelings are central to bringing forth the potential in every human being.

This interview series was spectacular! Truly we learned from a new wave of researchers and social entrepreneurs using the methods of social psychology and cognitive neuroscience to challenge our views on empathy and compassion.