Philanthrocapitalism and new clothes

Posted on April 11, 2008 by sse

One of the frustrations of recent events I’ve attended has been the common assumption that what comes from business into the social sector must be “better”: venture philanthropy will revolutionise philanthropy, coherent investment-style metrics will revolutionise social impact, risk investment, social stock exchanges and loan funds will provide liquidity for the sector, and social enterprises will scale up in order to meet the challenges they face. Etc.

As regular readers of this blog will know, SSE‘s view of social entrepreneurship is an inclusive, broad-based one, not one that insists that social entrepreneurs must “have large-scale impact” to warrant the label, nor one that insists that social entrepreneurs must “earn income and trade”, nor one that thinks impact is only delivered by an organisation’s services, and not also through its operations in the round. For us, at its simplest level, social entrepreneurship is about entrepreneurial individuals applying themselves for social / public benefit rather than solely personal gain.

Further to this, the sector an organisation comes from, its legal structure, or its financing is not a guarantee of efficiency, quality, greater impact, excellence or even, in some cases, competence. Measurement in this sector is more difficult, intangible, and (at times) nebulous than the financial bottom line. Venture philanthropists have a more sensitive, complex role than venture capitalists….and so on. In reality, there should be knowledge transfer and learning between sectors (and always has been); indeed, the action learning process that underpins the SSE programme was originally pioneered in large companies for senior management. And, when ‘business-like’ is equated with more professional or making best use of its money (and people), then no-one has an issue with that either…

But, currently, it has felt rather one way (though I wouldn’t wish to generalise: there are those who have a much more nuanced understanding all along the spectrum): and focusing more on business practice in the social sector, rather than achieving greater social equity and transformation. Hence my welcome for Paul Farmer’s remarks at the Skoll event recently. And hence also my interest in this new book by Michael Edwards: Just Another Emperor? The myths and realities of philanthropcapitalism. It looks at the application of business practices to the social sector / philanthropy in great detail and, as far as I’ve read, speaks much sense, as well as provoking debate. I won’t go on too much more, but would recommend starting with the transcript from the launch downloadable here, and I’ll end this rather long post with a short quote from that which gives you a flavour of the argument:

“[Another] area where philanthrocapitalism claims to make an impact is in
improving the financial and the management capacities of civil society organisations.
However, I’ve always been confused by the way venture philanthropists and social
entrepreneurs differentiate themselves from the rest of civil society on the grounds
that they are “results based” or “high performance”, implying that everyone else is
uninterested in outcomes.replica uhren Now sure, there are mediocre citizens groups, that’s true,
just as there are mediocre businesses, mediocre venture philanthropists, mediocre
social entrepreneurs and mediocre government departments. So why import the
practices of mediocrity into the social sectors, is Jim Collin’s conclusion, of Good to
Great fame.

What separates good and bad performance has very little to do with
business thinking or involvement in the market. What separates them is whether
they have a clear focus to their work, strong learning and accountability mechanisms
that keep them heading in the right direction and the ability to motivate their staff, or
volunteers, to reach the highest collective levels of performance. There’s no evidence
I know of which proves that business thinking, or business experience, can generate
those advances more effectively than experience in other sectors.”

Wednesday round-up: OTS, Olympics, Obama

Posted on April 2, 2008 by sse

In a radical break with tradition, here’s a Wednesday round-up for you of relevant news, views and opinion.

– First up, I’ve tried to capture a fair bit of Skoll, and post-Skoll coverage: that would be a links page on its own, though, so best viewed and checked out via our Del.icio.us bookmarks link at http://del.icio.us/SSE/Skoll which encompasses a pretty decent cross-section….

– A social enterprise business park as an Olympic legacy: sounds good. And most interestingly, put forward by someone who is a practitioner, not an umbrella org looking for funds; and we used Calverts for our last big printing job (highly recommended)

– When Muhammad met Liam (Yunus and Black): interesting conversation transcript

– A compare and contrast on social franchising (US- based) from Social Enterprise Reporter

– CSR as a business strategy

– Decent piece on (social) entrepreneurship / government policy in HBR; incidentally, there is a piece in the current Stanford Social Innovation Review which suggests what the new US president (come on Obama!) should do in this field. More on this soon…

– Also in SSIR is a piece about the relationship between producitivity and impact in the non-profit sector; it’s called "More Bang for the Buck" which gives you an indication of where it’s coming from. I think I took more from this case study

– Big welcome to the first 4 UK Ashoka Fellows, and congrats to Ben Metz for pulling off a good event the other evening. The Fellows are Camila Batmanghelidjh, Al Harris, Bob Paterson, and Faisel Rahman.

– OTS has released a piece of research from Rocket Science on Social Enterprise Networks. I found this useful and informative, but I’m not sure if that’s only because I’m approaching sector-geek status. What the report does do, alongside give a good overview of regional and sub-regional networks, is emphasise the need for more peer-to-peer learning / networks….and wisely pulls out SSE as a case study. :0)

More soon, when the frenzy of the last few weeks calms itself…..do buy some extra reading in the meantime :0)

Skoll Forum (part 1…)

Posted on March 27, 2008 by sse

First missive from here at the Skoll Forum; just thought I’d give a run down on yesterday afternoon’s opening proceedings.

Opening ceremony was in the Sheldonian Theatre, which is beautiful and old…but also pretty uncomfortable after a couple of hours. Nevertheless, pretty impressive surroundings to kick off in.

First up, after Stephan Chambers (Chair, Skoll Centre) welcomed us in his engaging, wry manner, Jeff Skoll spoke, and was very entertaining, noting that Al Gore and Muhammad Yunus both won the Nobel Prize after they had been keynote speaker at the Forum ("coincidence? I don’t think so…"). His theme was that this movement was now entering the mainstream: a case of "here we are" rather than "here we come" (he backed this up with examples from Bill Gates, Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey: an alternative trinity to conjur with).

Next up was Lord Giddens who had an engaging style, no notes…and some half decent jokes. With the theme being "culture", though, it seemed strange to have him talk on climate change…it also felt a bit like a beginner’s guide to climate change. With a room of people who know those issues inside out, this seemed strange….and it kind of felt like he’d been booked for his speaking credentials, rather than his relevance to social entrepreneurship (occasionally, he’d seem to remember and say something like "…which is..er.. why we need you, the social entrepreneurs"). His three key issues, for the record, that we need to tackle are: freeriding, hyperbolic discounting (not taking the future seriously), and "spending" the energy we save.

Phil Hope, the Minister for the Third Sector was next, and gave a pretty rousing speech. It was nicely structured, using Beveridge / welfare state / "stalking giants" as a frame for what is needed, and what has changed, 60 years on. He talked encouragingly of the need to "mobilise social entrepreneurs" who have a "vital and catalytic role", and also of the need to work with an engaged government, rather than ignoring the state altogether. With 700 people from 40 different countries, it did feel a bit domestically-focused (people near me were glazing over at the mention of social clauses, and other elements of government activity; as well as asking me who Harold Wilson was…).

The example he used of a social entrepreneur creating an opportunity and movement seized by government also seemed strange: the anti-plastic bag movement started in a town in Devon, then picked up in the media, then rolled out by government. The Irish government didn’t need the Daily Mail et al to pick the issue up to ban them 5 years ago, and was government taken by the idea…or by the media coverage?….Overall, though, I was fairly impressed, and he had some nice lines ("real change cannot be financed by small change") and powerful delivery.

The final part was a panel of women who’d worked in cross-cultural projects and initiatives. The one who stood out for me was Jody Williams, who I confess to never having heard of before. She won the Nobel Peace Prize for pulling off the treaty banning landines in 95 countries, and was just outstanding: on respect and trust for partners, on communication and sharing of information, on not worrying who gets the credit: "nobody was more important than anybody else". Really inspired by her, particularly given our international initiatives.

Finally, Stephan Chambers wrapped up, reminding us of the forum theme of culture: shared experience, behaviour, habits… and that "behaviour isn’t geology" (i.e. it keeps changing). But he was brief because, as he pointed out, "I’m the only thing standing between you feeling your legs again and getting a drink". Nice touch.

Then we all packed off to Trinity College for drinks in a marquee (the heavens opened as we left the theatre, ensuring that I networked heavily with people with umbrellas); all good stuff, and met some interesting people from Israel, Latvia, Russia, China, as well as some more familiar faces from the UK and Ireland. Dinner followed on with the Social Entrepreneurs Ireland team, Nigel Kershaw, Yasmin from Lovells et al….

All of which made getting up to deliver our presentation at 8am a little challenging. But it went well, and have just missed the first scheduled session because of the continuing conversations afterwards (which I think is a good sign: all the good stuff happens off the programme!)….but will try and get back on track with one of the new ‘consultancy clinics’ (dreadful name, but good people by the look of it) this afternoon.

Over and out.

Welcome to our social enterprise blog. Here you'll find news, views and updates from the School for Social Entrepreneurs.