After this class, staying informed and in loop

This class has been a great learning experience and testing ground for ideas. Thank you to Professor Zak and my fellow classmates!

I have started to read the Innovation section of Global Public Square, it is very interesting and a way that I will continue to stay informed: http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/category/innovation/

What I like about this site is that it compiles articles and editorials on not just innovations, but the circumstances surrounding them. As we can imply from class and as is presented here, social innovation isn't just associated with creating a new market niche or taking risks, it's about how we can assess food shortages and how a solution such a Plumpy'Nut can mitigate even a few of the complexities and be made accessible, or how we can simplify an initiative and yet be innovative as we learned about the MIT students' initiative to take pictures in space, or how even a slight modification to an existing technology can have a significant impact in addressing certain needs as conveyed in the World Bank's Development Marketplace Learning at Leisure initiative on this site.

New Business Models to Attract New Audiences

In "New Business Models In Emerging Markets", the authors focus on four aspects to building the new model; the customer value proposition, a profit formula, key processes, and key resources. While, these are key for emerging markets, they may be important for current markets to attract new business.

Arts audiences are literally dying. As the audience ages and fewer young people are brought into the theater, museum, symphony etc. organizations are finding it difficult to generate earned and contributed revenue. Trying to get young people invested in an organization or art form starts by having them experience the art. More and more organizations are offering deeper student or young adult discount or events that attract a younger audience. An avid lover of the theater may pay $60 for a seat, while the one right next to them is sold for $15 to a student. This customer value proposition is important to drawing in a new audience. Once they are hooked and they can afford it, patrons will value the product more and be willing to pay for it.

The new profit formula for arts organization can take on two aspects; earned and contributed revenue. We already talked about earned revenue with less expensive tickets. Contributed revenue is an entirely different issue. I received a letter in the mail asking me to donate $150 to my alma mater. When I break it down to about $12 a month, it's not that bad, so we don't go out to eat one time. However, being asked for $150 out of my bank account was not an option. For younger generations, organizations need to focus on installments billing. Paying 10 dollars a month over a year is great and can get the younger audience further invested in the work.

The key resources and processes hinder on the same variable: technology. Marketing and branding have always been an important part of running an arts organization, but they is completely changing for Generation Z. They spend over 10 hours a day with some sort of media and often several kinds at one time. Organizations need to invade these platforms rather than focusing on the traditional pathways to their audience. A systems group is currently working with the Carnegie Museum of Art to map out a social media plan and how to sustain it. This will be integral to attracting a new audience and insuring the museum's mission. This process has the chance to revamp their audience and bring new life into the organization.

Building new models for business does not have to focus on emerging markets. The for-profit sector may have this luxury, but many non-profit organizations do not. They must reconfigure their business model for their current state. Attracting a new audience to the arts will determine the survival of many organizations in the next twenty to thirty years.

Build something new out of the old.

This is in response to Christine's post about Masdar City. The graphic is beautiful and the idea of a sustainable city in the desert is a very cool idea, but whenever I see something so shiny and new, I think of areas that have been left behind. I'm not totally knocking what is happening in and around Abu Dhabi, more reacting to the sense that to be innovative something must be new and totally created out of nothing.

What I get excited about is the repurposing of existing buildings and structures into new model spaces that can not only drive the creation of ideas, but also elevate an area. Pittsburgh contains tons of these examples and I even work at one of them, the Mattress Factory. The Mattress Factory has taken 2 (soon to be 3) decrepit buildings in a historic neighborhood in Pittsburgh and transformed them into contemporary art spaces. Among my favorite examples are the churches in the city that are being refurbished and repurposed into arts spaces, breweries, residency centers and entertainment venues.

Repurposing and renovating existing buildings and areas can elevate a geographic location to new heights. I don't know if everything being developed for Masdar City necessarily couldn't be applicable to existing cities. Why build a brand new city in the desert when you could improve a city at home. I guess my point is homegrown innovation. Develop new models, implement great new ideas and create lasting impact in an area that already exists rather than build it in a far off land. Human centered design for where humans already are and need it.

less is more

Are we too caught up in bells and whistles to appreciate and explore novelty? It seems like so many companies are focusing on product development in developing markets where they can create much cheaper alternatives to products that already exist. Creating medical equipment that hospitals in poorer countries can actually afford is an admirable achievement, but the disparity between what seems to be necessary here when compared to other places is somewhat troubling. In an effort to create more affordable alternatives, companies are finding new and innovative ways of doing things. I wonder if we are missing out on this kind of innovation by being so focused on having the most expensive, most detailed products available. It seems like it requires more novel thought to make things cheaper than it does to make them fancier. The focus in America on having products that doing 100 things at once seems like it is hindering us from thinking differently on what products and services we actually need.

The markets that need a new business model at home

My mother attended the same undergraduate university as me. Often when I was sitting in the library researching on my computer I would try to imagine her searching through reference stacks, peering at the microfilm screen, and waiting for updated binders of CQ researcher to be delivered. The thought of obtaining any degree without access to a computer and the internet is unimaginable to me. Awhile back when I first started hearing about groups that were trying to provide laptops and internet access to students, I was in that camp of people that question the value of internet access versus teacher training or other educational resources, but more and more I realize how important bridging this gap is. Sometimes in class I am frustrated hearing about products and services adapted to emerging markets and wondering whether these same approaches can be taken to address access and availability problems here within certain income groups in the states. Eyring, Johnson, and Nairs article discusses the importance of developing new business models to approach these new markets. I question whether this sort of incentive could exist here in the states. The economist article “beyond voice” discusses how the mobile networks coupled with inexpensive netbooks will probably drive expanded internet access. I was interested to find out a couple of weeks that this use of netbooks (but not mobile broadband) is actually being brought to the US through Comcast. FCC basically forced Comcast to promise to work on affordable internet access because of the NBC acquisition (but of course Comcast is not advertising that fact). Comcast is starting to provide a program called “Internet Essentials” where families who meet certain income requirements (the same as those whose children receive free or discounted lunch) can sign up for internet access for about 10$ a month, with free installation and a voucher for a small netbook provided by dell or acer. Critics say the connection is likely to be extremely slow (and those of us who are forced to use Comcast know the pretty poor quality of service those who pay standard rates get). Still- it’s something. Now families will be able to access internet beyond library and school hours. In each city, internet essentials is partnering with public servants and community groups to help publicize the program and provide internet literacy training. Here in Pittsburgh, the Urban League of Greater Pittsburgh is integrating training into existing programs. The program just started so there is little to no information of its impact, how many people have signed up, or other details. There’s also little info on the business plan. I wonder how sustainable the project is—the price is much less than current Comcast standard rates but given the slow connection and the infrastructure already in place, and the fact that there is a partnership with Dell and Acer to provide the netbooks, I wonder whether the 10 per month is covering the cost of the program. The program is scheduled to continue for three years, but if Comcast can prove it profitable, other internet providers will probably follow suit. We’ll have to keep our eyes on this project, and watch out for other approaches for meeting the needs of American’s beyond the middle/upper income groups. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11229/1167779-53-0.stm http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2393253,00.asp#fbid=kwF9fAXM8yL http://www.internetessentials.com/news/News.aspx http://www.fiercecable.com/story/microsoft-best-buy-back-fcc-connect-compete-initiative/2011-10-12

Passion

We have spent a lot of time talking about the business of social innovation. We have looked into how is social innovation is paid for, what does a social good model look like, what is that process by which innovation comes about? These are all critical questions, without good answers to these questions and others like them social innovations would end up as merely good ideas and dreams. I think that we have overlooked the most critical part of true social innovation, something that cannot be taught --- Passion. This field needs “true believers”, people who believe in their vision and goals so much they will do anything to make it reality. Those who are willing to put the “99% perspiration” into an idea to really make it work. Darell Hammond is a perfect example of this. Even in a brief one hour presentation you can clearly see his passion. Through what at times seemed like sheer will he turned his passion into a national enterprise. While he clearly knows a lot about technical issues and business strategies I believe that it is his passion that makes him a success. These are the type of people that this field and this nation require, people of passion, who not only drive themselves restlessly toward their goals but in the process inspire others to the same level of passion and dedication.

Social Impact Bonds... in Pittsburgh?

For our last blog, and our last class, I wanted to explore an idea from class that I found especially interesting (and that members of the class seemed to be particularly intrigued by too): social impact bonds.

Though Wikipedia is sometimes derided by people as being unreliable (and sometimes for good reason), I've found that it's a great way to get an overview of a topic before delving into further, confirming research. The following are interesting facts that I learned about social impact bonds as they pertain to the U.S. from the corresponding Wikipedia article: in the U.S., these bonds are commonly referred to as a Pay for Success Bond, they are most similar to equity investments (this we could surmise from our conversations in class), an organization in Boston is offering social impact bonds in the U.S., Barack Obama's proposed 2012 budget stated that up to $100 million would be freed up to run Social Impact Bond pilot schemes, and there is a debate about whether or not public bodies could or should be potential investors (Young Foundation's definition of Social Impact Bonds versus Social Finance's definition of social impact bonds). A report from the Center for American Progress, released in February 2011, analyzes the potential of Social Impact Bonds, here:http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/02/social_impact_bonds.html.

Here's a link to the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_impact_bond

We learned in class and from our readings that recidivism (or re-offenders) is currently being used as a social impact bond pilot in the U.K. As an interesting parallel in our own community, this is the RAND study about Allegheny County's Mental Health Court and recidivism I mentioned in class a couple of weeks ago: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR439.html. There is a two-page summary PDF of their findings at the bottom of the page. In short, the court system basically breaks even on providing mental health services for the first year to offenders in danger of recidivism but stands to achieve a net gain due to decreased recidivism with long-term treatment for these offenders. This treatment also reduces the risk of psychological hospitalization - a very costly action for the state.

The UK is also exploring the potential impact of Social Impact Bonds to support early childhood education initiatives and family support services.

What do you think - could social impact bonds work in Pittsburgh?

-Whitney Coble

Does social innovation equal social change?

"'These tools are actually not that complicated,'Change.org founder Ben Rattray said, downplaying the 'innovation' part of the technology.'Social change is less about the tools and more about the applications of those tools.'"

This article examines the use of social media such as Facebook and Twitter in light of the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, as well as the revolutionary efforts in Egypt and other countries in the Middle East. Like many issues, the implication that the social innovation itself is causing social change can be seen from more than one angle. Of course, there have always been revolutionaries - the American Revolution (among countless others) didn't need a network of computers to get off the grounds and spread their message. There were certain leaders (and there are certain leaders today) that had a vision and the ability to mobilize people for their vision of change. This idea is express in the quote at the top of the post taken from the article. Even so, the ease of spreading ideas and the ability to make plans of action cannot be underestimated. With sites like Tumblr, anyone can share their story on the "We are the 99 percent" site in support of Occupy Wall Street (and, a few days later, those against the movement can share their ideas on the "53 percent" Tumblr). Neither side has to wait for television coverage or wait until they are published in a national newspaper to get coverage; every individual can spread their ideas across the world in seconds.

Is it fair to say that every social innovation creates social change? Probably not in this aspect, at least in my opinion. Without a doubt, good social innovation can impact society and change the way of life that wouldn't be possible without some sort of new innovation. Improvements in quality of life can expand one's horizons and their ability to change their own destiny. However, I think there are few innovations so simple as a Twitter than can profoundly impact millions, or potentially billions, of people from around the world.

Similarly related to this concept of using social media for social change is the organization "TwitChange." In order to raise money for various charitable causes, celebrities such as Troy Polamalu and Kim Kardashian have fans bid money to have that celebrity tweet their account name or subscribe to their Twitter. The cost of running the program is extremely low as the prize involves a few lines of text on a website. Although using Twitter in this manner is not aiming to start a social revolution, the social innovation of Twitter allows for a much greater impact without large overhead fees.

Although social innovation is not always needed for social change, the social innovation present in social media has such a great potential to further spread social change, or to result in more innovative ways to provide for charitable causes.

See Masdar City

After reading the article about Masdar City, I really wanted to see it for myself. After some searching, here's a visual tour of the city. It's amazing how Foster & Partners balanced the traditional and modern, while accommodating the diverse groups of people. You see everything from the solar panels, electric cars, and gorgeous architecture.

Check out this graphic that plans out this sustainable city:

That's Nice but What About...

Yesterday this article, The End of the Future, magically appeared in my inbox. The author, Peter Thiel, is the founder of PayPal and he questions whether our society has come to the end of it's innovating ability. To me, his metrics are questionable. In the second section, he holds our modern-day accomplishments against projections from the 1950s and 60s and basically outs himself as a member of the generation bitter about the lack of commercially available flying cars and/or jet packs. However, our obvious failings to keep up with things like 70s energy policy are disappointing to say the least.
It's nearly impossible to make projections about innovation because it quite often, it springs from a source or a problem that may not currently exist and certainly didn't exist in 1960. But Thiel's points are valid. We may have innovated ourselves into a corner, skipped over arguably more important things like energy independence in favor of smaller and smaller microprocessors. It seems like what Thiel is trying to say is that now that we've come this far, with cellphones in the hands of millions of people, with Moore's Law outperforming Moore's expectations - can we work on what we've missed? Can we use our social networks, our supercomputers and our smart phones to eliminate the gender gap, straighten out the economy and improve our general well-being instead of using technology as a distraction from these larger problems.
Perhaps we need a formalized, national goal - like putting a man on the moon - to get behind. Is there any way we can inspire both pride and consensus in our generation to work toward a positive accomplishment?

New Business Models in Emerging Markets: MIT DakNet Project

When reading the Harvard Business Review in this week’s readings, all I could think about was a project that I had learned about when I was visiting MIT last year as part of a Science and Technology Workshop. The project is called DakNet (name derived from the Hindi word for post or postal) and its mission is “Rethinking Connectivity in Developing Nations”. The idea behind the project is to “provide low-cost digital communication, letting remote villages leapfrog past the expense of traditional connectivity solutions and begin development of a full-coverage broadband wireless infrastructure”. In simple words: initiators of the DakNet project, First Mile Solutions, targeted people at the bottom of the pyramid by providing them with low cost internet connectivity in an innovative way.

The DakNet project initiated in India, and later expanded in Cambodia, Rwanda and Costa Rica, was a reaction to a popular claim that people living in rural areas don’t need more than mobile services. What seemed to be a sensible observation for some was not adding any value to the people targeted by ubiquitous telephone services. MIT Media Lab researchers identified the need to provide services that span beyond telephony under the umbrella of “broadband connectivity for everyone” in a simple, accessible and affordable way, all three qualities highlighted in the business model innovation and implementation process mentioned in the reading.

The idea is simple because it leverages on the concept of giving people access to internet. It takes advantage of the existing communications and transportation infrastructure in the villages to combine physical transportation means with wireless data transfer. DakNet provides non-real time internet access by connecting mobile access points: kiosks and hubs to WiFi radio transceivers typically attached on moving vehicles: bikes, bicycles and buses. The system is broken into two steps:

1. When one of the moving vehicles comes within a range with a WiFi enabled device (a kiosk), it uploads and downloads megabytes of data.

2. When one of the moving vehicles comes within a range with an Internet access point (a hub), it synchronizes the data collected.

The figure below illustrates the model:

The most basic scenario would be:

· Someone opening a email client and sending an email from a kiosk in the village.

· The email is stored in the machine waiting for a mobile access point to come close.

· A mobile access point is detected by the kiosk and the email is transmitted from the kiosk to the mobile access point carried by a moving vehicle.

· The mobile access point is detected by the hub and the email is transmitted to the hub.

· The email is sent via internet.

What I think is fascinating about this project is that the researchers recognized the myths that were hovering around people in the bottom of the pyramid:

· Shared telephones are the best model.

· They don’t need computers.

· Connectivity, if offered must be real time.

The DakNet model is based on the idea that poor people do not necessarily need or want a shared communication medium, that they need access to more information that could add value to their daily life: health, agriculture, trade, education… and that asynchronous (not real time) services could be sufficient to meet the needs in many rural areas.

For end users of the kiosks, the cost was approximately $20/year and knowing that the average yearly income for a villager in India is about $1800, the service was deemed affordable especially that it improved the quality of the life in rural areas mainly by giving people access to information and services. Finally, the process is accessible and is typically implemented in collaboration with local non-profits and governmental agencies and made available to people through many kiosks in the villages managed by trained people.

Ultimately, the potential for such business models in emerging markets is amazingly vast but requires detecting the needs with an objective eye. We are all affected in one way or another by our lifestyles and beliefs, which could impede us from seeing the true needs of people in the bottom of the pyramid.

Sources:

http://www.firstmilesolutions.com/documents/FMS_Case_Study.pdf

http://courses.media.mit.edu/2003fall/de/DakNet-Case.pdf

http://www.firstmilesolutions.com/documents/DakNet_IEEE_Computer.pdf

Container Architecture

I wanted to share the concept of Container Architecture with our class. The popularity of using durable and low cost freight containers in meeting needs for housing, healthcare, and in this case, a mobile data center. In 2008, Sun Microsystems (now Oracle) unveiled Project Blackbox, a mobile data server housed within a freight storage container than can be used in disaster or difficult to reach locales. All you need to add is a little water and internet connectivity and you've got eight full-sized racks with cooling and power management systems built in.

The containers praised for their simple adaptation to meet a variety of needs, designers are adapting their utility to be used in an eco-friendly and socially responsible manner.

competition and social value

This week, as we reflect on the future of social innovation, I find myself synthesizing ideas from both our class and my corporate strategy class. I want to share some of that course material, because it has interesting implications for how social innovators view sustainability.

CMU professor Jeffrey Williams’ Renewable Advantage defines three laws of competition:
1. convergence - a firm initially captures value through innovation, and the market converges as competitors imitate the new product
2. alignment - the degree of company-customer fit determines how profitable a firm can be at any given point on the convergence curve, and
3. renewal - a firm must restore its competitive advantage through asset recapitalization and further innovation

The premise is that nothing lasts; value itself is continually being extracted and depleted. So, while the sidebar formula in “New Business Models in Emerging Markets” looks helpful, it is at best a short-term approach. A human-centered design outlook that searches for “jobs being done poorly” is inherently reactive, unconcerned with creating demand. On the other hand, a long-term strategy is proactive and anticipatory, even visionary.

When you are meeting basic needs, perhaps you can afford to be reactive, but only to a point. Eventually, a competitor will surprise you with a solution that changes basic needs and satisfies new ones. If a business model “works,” the market should converge around it until something better emerges.

Compared to the private sector, the social sector often lacks convergent best practices. We think of ourselves as on the same side, which can lead to complacency and mediocrity. Of course, not every worthy endeavor can be profitable or self-sustaining, but we do ourselves a disservice if we aren’t hard-nosed about creating marketable value and competitive advantage. In the future, as social innovation becomes a more crowded multi-sector field, we will need to think in dynamic market terms.

Where does intrinsic value fit into this framework? My opinion is that it doesn’t.* Mulgan defines social value as “the product of the dynamic interaction between supply and demand in the evolution of markets for social value.” In other words, social value is what “someone” is willing to pay for, and the critical job for social market-makers is to match need with willingness to pay. This seems potentially consistent with Williams' framework, where innovation is the mechanism of renewal.

How do you reconcile intrinsic value, dynamic value, and the laws of competition?


*I say this as a former philosophy major who worked at a religiously affiliated, philanthropic nonprofit before coming to business school. Personal value systems are motivating and important. However, they resist quantification for metrics or exchange rates.

The future looks bright!

I believe the three key elements in ensuring the bright future of social innovation and enterprises are:

1) Emerging Markets: Growth is immense in emerging markets and most companies realise this to be a huge opportunity. There is a need to provide goods and services to people in growing economies at afforadable prices. This 'need 'would serve to be the main driver for social innovation in the coming years.

2) New business models: Emerging markets are inherently different from mature markets and warrant the need for new buiness models. Emerging markets are more likely to be a 'low-price, high-volume game' . Companies who come up with new buiness models (and test them for the needs of the customers in emerging markets) would be able to thrive in these conditions.

3) Mobile and Internet: 'Access' is a key issue that any social innovation venture would need to address. Access to information and then the products and services would continue to improve as more of the world's population gets access to mobile phones and the internet.

I hope and wish that social entrepreneurship becomes a virtuous cycle. I hope to live enough to see someone who was once at the bottom of the pyramid to himself one day create an organization like Ashoka

Funding Ideas Based on Awesomeness

The readings this week spoke to the concept of building new business models. They looked at what elements that make those models successful, and pinpointing what are the best markets to go into, taking a variety of characteristics into account.

However, the age-old question inevitably comes up when thinking of any sort of venture which require money. Funding. How to get the money, what is the best source, and will it last long enough to bring about the kind of change that the ideas strives for. What if there was another way to look at funding these ideas. Over this course, we have discussed different funding models, the role of government in fueling innovation, and the importance of sustainability in driving investors to projects. All of the ideas that we have read about have merit, and all of them have elements of innovation to them as well. Yet, in each of the different models, with different funding possibilities, there are hoops of some sort to jump through in order to make ideas come to life.

Although in Boston, things are starting to change. We’ve discussed micro-financing, and its impact on the developing world, but what about the idea of micro-financing, from micro-grantmakers? Well a Harvard grad thought that was just the key to create social change, by taking one element into account: Awesomeness.

This is essentially the idea behind The Awesome Foundation, created by a group of tech-savvy twentysomethings from Cambridge in 2009. The idea is simple, each grantee chips in $100 each month, and they all review submissions, with the winner receiving $1,000. The key is-no strings attached. The Awesome Foundation is interesting in funding just that-awesome ideas that contribute in a positive way to society. They are looking to create change, without the typical bureaucratic rules that is often associated with established funding sources.

They are simple, driven, and dedicated. The money might not be massive, but the concept is. Already, there are 23 chapters around the world, with word spreading fast through the social channels. Can 'awesomeness' change the world? Well that is yet to be seen, but in the meantime, it'll surely push through some pretty great ideas....

A fresh approach to homelessness

I have come across another incredibly inspiring social venture. This one is the Homeless Garden Project in Santa Cruise, California. As their mission states, “The Homeless Garden Project provides job training and transitional employment to people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. The programs offer trainees an opportunity to rebuild and develop basic life skills and a sense of worth as human beings.” (Visit their site at: http://www.homelessgardenproject.org/)

The Homeless Garden Project is a community garden that provides job training and work opportunities to homeless people by teaching them how to grow organic food. In addition to the job-training garden, they operate a Community Supported Agriculture operation, an online store and a physical store in Santa Cruise, a Women’s Organic Flower Enterprise, a “Connecting with Community” program that helps the trainees find needed resources and assistance, a kitchen and resource canter that prepares 4 hot meals per week for the program participants, as well as offering workshops and other educational opportunities to others in the community. 25% of their income comes from CSA share purchases and sales from their store.

I really love learning more about social ventures that take a holistic approach to social problems. These problems do not occur in a vacuum, they are interconnected with many other social issues. Unfortunately, many of our traditional ways of addressing social problems take a “silo” approach and only address problems at the surface level (emergency shelters, soup kitchens, etc.). By considering all parts of the system that are contributing to the problem, you can have a greater impact on people’s lives. How can we change the status quo and start becoming more innovative in our approaches to serious problems like hunger and shelter, making them both more effective and more financially sustainable?

The Risks of an Exponentially Increasing Market

While reading through the incredible innovations with cell phones in developing countries, and the process of which to achieve successful implementations, I couldn’t help picturing the boom and decline of the “dot com” era of the 1990’s in the United States.  Clearly these companies are providing extremely useful services for its target market, and utilizing new and innovative approaches to do so.  But the article that states “global mobile cellular technology will surpass 100% within the next decade” brings to mind an extremely accelerated growth of exponential proportions.  The possibility and potential for growth, whether it’s business income or improving the lives of the users, is as positive as it is an invitation for companies or individuals who are not as responsible with their missions and profit making as the social innovators who are currently jumping into the field.

The 1990’s internet boom in the United States also had that exponential feel.  The leaders in the market clearly showed that many services can be made available and affordable more efficiently, and could turn a quick (or long term) profit for the owners.  The exponential growth attracted people because of the huge realm of possibilities.  The more people that jumped onto the “dot com” train, the more options were available.  Soon people who did not spend valuable time analyzing their markets and carefully adapting any kind of business plan saturated the market until disaster struck. 

There are a number of companies who started during this time and are still hugely successful, like Amazon and eBay.  However, the natural selection of internet users effectively weeded out the less useful sites and the American e-commerce industry is no worse for the wear.  But can Michael Malime, the farmer in Uganda, weather through a market explosion and decline of the “dot com” proportions?  The holes that are being filled and the needs that are being met in developing countries are not as superficial as many of the U.S. companies that jumped in the expanding market.  How do we ensure that the people who are benefitting from mobile-based, and soon internet-based technology do not suffer from the failure of an exponentially expanding market’s sudden demise?  This invites the issue of evaluating evaluate these companies and organizations that are entering the market, and that conversation is being debated hotly by many parties.

I do not have an answer for this issue, but I believe it deserves thought.  Once these innovative companies identify, enter, and effectively meet needs with a large profit, others will try and enter solely for the profit without the care to their consumers or their business plan.  Can they sustain that kind of market trauma and how do we ensure that they don’t have to?

Has Social Innovation Abandoned the Developed World

So much of what we have discussed over these seven weeks has been focused on foreign nations such as India, South Africa or China. It goes without saying that innovation is needed in these countries to help those at the bottom of the pyramid- and companies like Google and GE that we read about this week are taking that seriously. We even once again read about the work of Nicholas Negroponte and his One Laptop Per Child program that perhaps hasn't reached its goals, but is putting laptops in the hands of hundreds of thousands of students worldwide. I then think back to some of the videos we've watched - Plumpynut helping starving children, pumps for subsistence farmers, and water filters for women and families. All of this work should be recognized as innovation and will hopefully inspire others to think about what's possible. As I was reading the GE Remodels Business In India and Finishing the Job articles, I was struck by the lack innovation we have read about in the United States and other developed nations. I was left with the question, has social innovation abandoned the developed world? I applaud Negroponte for his efforts around the world, but how many students in US schools do not have access to computers? Quality textbooks? Good teachers? You do not have to travel too far from MIT's campus to see the failures of our public school systems. Likewise, I am excited about the work GE is doing around maternal infant care in India, but again I ask, how many cities in this nation face staggering infant mortality rates? Currently in this country the mortality rate for African American infants is twice the national average. What innovations possibly exist to change this? GE's marketing director stated, "we're targeting the bottom of the pyramid because that's where the masses exist." I am not refuting this point, but again, I am left with the question about the masses of low-income folks in the developed world who are suffering and struggling to get by. I just spent some time in San Francisco and the amount of homeless people on the street is nearly unbelievable - one of the largest I have seen in the US. I won't even mention Skid Row in Los Angeles. While our country is "developed" we are not without huge social challenges of which innovation could provide solutions to. We know that the traditional method of providing services does not work -what else is there? Is the social innovation field here to help us? I am in full support for innovations that help the bottom of the pyramid. I think we, governments, foundations, etc, need to support even more of that work and make it attractive for some of our brightest, most creative minds to devote themselves to these tasks. I would like to think we can innovate ourselves out of the problems that plague us: food scarcity, extreme poverty, inadequate education, maybe even war. What I don't think will work, however, is innovation ignoring the so-called developed world. Do we not have food scarcity, poverty, inadequate education and violence in this nation or other developed countries? Can we allow ourselves to innovate for those at the bottom of the pyramid worldwide, while at the same time addressing the needs of those at the bottom of our the developed world's economic pyramid? I don't think social innovation has abandoned the developed world just yet, but I do believe the field has forgotten the challenges we continue to face.

An Open Mind, Not An Empty One

"An open mind is perhaps the most important asset anyone can bring to emerging markets." This seems like a very apt quote from the Harvard Business Review article to wrap up the course with. I think open minds, "beginner's mind", is a common thread that runs throughout the concepts we have looked at: frugal engineering, conditional cash transfers, government in innovation, even the idea of innovation itself. This is not to mistake an open mind for an empty mind. Far from it. The article "New Business Models in Emerging Markets" sets out a systematic way of uncovering unmet needs. Instead of sitting in an office thinking up ideas you think your target customers want, you need to get out there! Study how customers use products, look at substitutes, observe what jobs are being done poorly, and uncover root causes for consumers' behaviors. In a way, this makes the job of social innovators easier. Freed from having to have all the answers themselves, they can access a wide and observable knowledge base-- that of real consumers. I love the way that the ChotuKool fridge was designed, with 600 village women working on a co-creation event. But you can be sure that this process was carefully thought out and managed, by providing the co-creators with prototypes, members of the design team on hand, and feasible options on the table. Ironically, "organic", bottom- up innovation benefits tremendously from careful planning and management beforehand. Social innovations don't come from haphazard free-for-alls. They are the result of careful preparation that assembles the right mix of people, ideas, and options in the right place at the right time. To me, an open mind means seeing the possibilities and being flexible with final outcomes, but clearly defining what your underlying goals and interests are. Otherwise, it's too easy to get lost along the way.

Innovation for All

I found the article “In Arabian Desert, a Sustainable City Rises” fascinating. It seems to combine all of the basics of the best ideas we have learned about then walls them up and cuts them off from the rest of the world. The underlying tone of the article seemed to imply that this city will only be accessible by the privileged few. I ask,” how is that social innovation?” If the UAE government wants to create a subset of their society as a whole, I don’t believe they can have a hand in choosing who should live in Masdar. This article brought to mind the microcosmic society that is CMU. It is obvious that the culture here is different from that of other universities in the makeup of the student body and their interests. It seems that Masdar will mirror CMU in that it will house only the best and brightest of academia (and their families) for the foreseeable future. How will this gauge the way this city will function once other members of society are introduced? Why not incorporate the wind towers, building angles and solar power into the existing infrastructure to combat the issues of affordable housing? Although these ideas are not new, they are not being utilized to benefit the whole of society. How will the “integrity” of a place such as Masdar be maintained? Abu Dhabi has a shortage of low income housing with housing prices at nearly 5 to 6 times the average yearly salary (http://www.albawaba.com/mena-faces-shortage-35m-affordable-homes-3927810). I don’t see a way that a city such as Masdar will have a benefit to the lower class. Masdar will create an even larger divide between the upper and lower class in Abu Dhabi.

Building on the positive buzz of social innovation in the U.S.

From mobile cash transfers, to rolling water containers and corn husk power systems this semester we have learned about the endless possibilities for improvement through innovation. We mostly focused on the impact social innovations introduced in developing countries though I believe developed countries will increasingly desire more sustainable, efficient ways of living as well.

In the United States especially, the social innovation buzz is hitting the public at the ideal time. Much of the groundwork has already been laid, many inspiring success stories exist, and there is a critical mass of support (not the least of whom is President Obama). This timing coincides perfectly with the recession. I am not attempting to say that the recession has been positive, but this is a silver lining. Americans mindsets about how they consume are changing and this change will positively impact how we embrace the social innovation movement.

Americans are the biggest consumers in the world and have been so in the past in complete blissful ignorance. We throw away huge amounts of food, use exorbitant amounts of energy, and pollute with unnecessarily large vehicles. However, more and more we are looking to downsize; buying generic brand goods and driving more fuel efficient vehicles. Americans are ready to embrace innovations that are more efficient, effective, and sustainable.

We need to build on this positive momentum and work to win the support of the resistors. We need keep social innovation from becoming politicized. We need to increase awareness, by offering more courses at universities and more opportunities that promote innovation. By opening the minds of future leaders to the impact that social innovations can have on society the more the bandwagon effect will take hold. We need to take it upon ourselves to answer the tough questions like how the government can facilitate the growth of social innovating and how can we take aspects futuristic cities like Masdar, and apply them to improvements in our cities.

Learn from Creation Myths to march into Emerging market(for the seventh class meeting))

http://wiki.ask.com/Emerging_markets

http://www.cs.williams.edu/~lindsey/myths/myths.html

Every nation has its history to wonder about the unknown and try to find answers to the unknown. This could be an essential part of human nature as well. So if we could inspire this part of human nature, most of the time it’s sleepy inside of most people, the march into emerging market could be more powerful.

In the reading, when it talks about Affordability, the author states that “a far more robust approach to creating an affordable emerging market offering is to trade off expensive features and functions that people don’t need for less-expensive ones they need.” When the “little cool”

Was disigned, the company invited 600 women to join the cocreation event, because these women knew what they need and what they don’t need. The same thing happened when the laundary machine was designed, the company did a comprehensive survey among those urban slum dwellers or rural villagers trying to figure out what they real need.

When traditional business still try very hard to hold its upper level cunstomers, they just missed the potentially most profitable market in terms of total consumptions. This is  the nich market window for innovative designing  to  meet those underserved group. But the precondition is to indeed understand what these people need and what they don’t need.

In order to do this, any company needs to spend a large portion of capital to do grassroots survey and will take a long time to process the information they get and they will figure out the valuable informationt they really need. It is to certain extent time-consuming and could be done in a better way.

Since those people they themselves would better understand their needs based on daliy functions in different aspects, which makes them the potential designers for many potential profitable products. If we can foster a designing culture in those emerging market countries, regions---narrow down to target markets, to motivate people to discover what they’ve found about their daily life—what kind of products are needed to make life eaiser and what kind of imporvements could be done to make those products they already used better serve their needs. These kind of designing culture itself could be rather contagious and interesting. In this way, any company could cooperate with people’s idea and shorten the product producing cycle. No matter the company is a start-up venture or a business conglomerate, its designing power could be maximumly enlarged by motivating people to do research in their daily life. What’s more this kind of designing culture also could be a rather solid base to nurture entrepreneurship culture in an area.

Mobile phones: Equal chance to the unlettered and lettered

HELPING THE UNLETTERED THROUGH MOBILE PHONE

When I was a kid growing up in Kumasi, one way by which people could communicate with their friends, relatives and loved ones was through sending the ‘message’ through someone. For those who were lettered, the post offered the best panacea. However, to the teeming masses, recording the message on cassette tape and mailing it used to be norm. Even with this method one has to own cassette recorder or player to record or play the message. Access to fixed telephone lines was a super luxury in the Ghana as it used to be associated with the economic status of the person. To admit this, we did not have a fixed telephone in our home.

Suddenly the dynamics changed and those who were in darkness found the light. Mobile phones came into the equation and wall that prevented the poor and the middle class from communicating tumbled down. From the University professor or the highest paid banker in Accra High Street to the lowest paid janitor everybody could use mobile phone for communication. Communicating through mobile phone became a classless occurrence in Ghana. As one of my friends has said “that your subject and verb does not have to agree, nor do you have to know how to derive Schrodinger equation in physics to be able to use a mobile phone”. This is to say that those educated and uneducated can use the device.

What’s more is what my friend Bright Simons from Imani Ghana devised whereby the authenticity of a pharmaceutical drug can be verified by either send the drug code or calling a toll free number.[1]

When I was interning in Ghana this summer, I met a friend of mine who is working on an automated ‘portal’ services where people could call in for answers to certain question concerning human rights, how to register your business or get building permit. For example, if a police stops an individual and wants to use his power to abuse you, the ‘suspect ‘ can call a toll free service and selecting the right option, you could get an answer to regarding your right in that situation. It is worth noted that in Ghana and in most developing countries, police and other security forces arbitrarily arrest people for minor offence or put differently abuse the public. By calling into the toll free number, one can listen and get quick review of the law. What that this mean? It means that people who cannot read or write can still invoke their constitutional and fundamental human rights whenever in need.

Prior before the coming of the mobile phone, every technology including fixed telephone, television, fax or attorney services were the exclusive preserve of the elite. It is therefore not an exaggeration to say that wall has fallen down. And now, in Ghana and in most developing world, mobile phone is touching life positively. Farmers can text to get weather update, market price for their product. Student can text to find out which school that he/she has been placed; and above all electronic payment system has brought a virtual banking services to the unbanked population.

Appiah Adomako

Heinz College

---

[1] "Kenya Launches Mobile Phone Application to fight Counterfeit Medicines - ModernGhana.com."Ghana HomePage - Breaking News, Business, Sports, Entertainment and Video News. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. .