Our society today is faced with many intimidating challenges and for this state to improve, those truly committed to improving it cannot shun away their individual responsibility and dwell in the easy languor of the past. Equal opportunity lies in front of each one of us to bring about a positive impact, individually or collectively. There are several examples of good citizenship on part of corporate today but not all of these efforts result in the intended success nor are sustainable. 
More often than not an initiative ‘ one initiated for non-profit purpose, lacks in the rigor which can usually be associated with a profit-making business venture. Social initiatives aiming to have a magnitude of impact need to have clearly defined purpose, vision, objectives, milestones, sustainability and measures for success. It would be useful to categorize them under ’social entrepreneurship’ as against the general ‘do good’ initiatives, for the results expected in both the cases are different.
The very first question we will need to ask would be in defining the right strategy for the kind of impact we want to create. The answer lies in a classical ‘T decision’, where the horizontal line depicts the breadth and the surface area it covers and the vertical line depicts the depth. For instance, the critical choice here may be between impacting the lives of say a million people by intervening or working at critical points of a process vs. a more in depth initiative of impacting the lives of few hundred by taking complete responsibility of the whole process.
Both kinds of initiatives have their merits, thus making this classical T decision very important from a visioning point of view, than execution, as it really does not matter how and where you start.
The second critical question to address is the issue of sustainability – long term sustainability, both in financial terms and in terms of the continuity of the initiative. Two models can be considered, which are quite distinct and again can be represented in the T form. The first model which is represented by the horizontal line can be equated with creating sustainability through partners collaborating for funding and execution. The second model depicted by the vertical line works on the principle that one organization or party takes on the ownership of bringing the change, not very different from how family owned business runs their operations. I truly believe that there is no limit to the amount of finance one can raise for such initiatives. The problem here has more to do with ideas and finding people with high credibility willing to roll up their sleeves for executing and scaling up the initiative.
The third critical question we need to ask is the value we intend to create through the initiative- value, which is unique and different and would thus impact people in ways it hasn’t in the past. The search for this value and the investment model that will help create it is core to such social transformation, especially if this initiative has to be sustained in the long run. Such social entrepreneurship models can be scaled up successfully while the ones lacking value centricity at their core probably would lose out while facing execution challenges.
The fourth critical question to address is whether the impact of the initiative can be assessed and measured easily. Various studies and research available today outline principles of measurement that help evaluate the impact on a scientific basis that organizations can use.
The last question we would need to answer is about the organization structure to adopt that would passionately create a long term sustainable initiative. The definition may differ as it comes from an introspection and discovery of the kind of people you would like to work with and the kind of culture and value you want the organization to imbibe and be known for. It is good to have a result oriented outlook for such initiatives; however some thinking on the long term and the short term perspective will go hand-in-hand in bringing the feeling of joy, achievement and fulfillment to all the people associated with it.
While many social initiatives are being taken on and will continue to be taken on, my belief is that our effort should be directed more towards initiatives that are sustainable and scalable for maximizing impact on society.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Hi Vineet, I like the model that you have described. Some observations on second question – "The first model which is represented by the horizontal line can be equated with creating sustainability through partners collaborating for funding and execution." This model has higher scalability as well as higher financial sustainability. If one of the pratners is local community benefitting from this initiaive then the sense of ownership makes it better governed and sustainable. A depth model will become charity and may not be very scalable as well as not financially sustainable (first thing to be axed incase the sponsor runs into rough weather OR if the CEO / exec sponsor for the initiative changes). Some more ideas on the measuring sustainability – any project that has higher benefit and lower cost to the sponsor will be sustainable. (stating the obvious) Benefit to Sponsor = Measure the CASH equivalent (eg Brand visibility created by this initiative equals brand visibility generated by advertisement to the tune of X lakh) Cost to Sponsor = (Cash spent by Sponsor) – (Revenue generated by community) The financial sustainability will happen if the higher benefit and lower costs are there, however continuity will happen only if the community ownership is there. Revenue generated by community for funding that initiaitve is what will define the continuity of the initiative. This cost of benefiting from initiative will ensure that the there is least misuse.
On the third question ie value created , I am not so very sure that the value created has to be unique and different. I think it has to be significant. Significant to the people whom it is going to impact, as well as impacting significant percentage of population. eg of such initiatives can be 1. Wheel chairs at Railway stations * Great for getting brand visibility (by "HCL Community Initiative" brand on each wheelchair as well as dedicated coolies wearing HCL brand clothing.
* High impact – ask any one who has an old / disabled person in family
* High percentage of target population (old / disabled) being impacted – atleast once in a while
* Cost = (Cost of 10 coolies + Cost of wheelchair + Maintenance) – (Cost of the 10 small Hoarding + Charge of using the service). BTW this is not a new or unique benefit. Just that HCL being there would mean better execution and hence the benefit being actually passed on. 2. Mobile internet cafe meant for Govt schools with no infra
* Great for getting brand visibility (by "HCL Community Initiative" brand on Shining large green truck; coverage in magazines / newspaper ; goodwill)
* Cost = (Truck + Equipment + Internet connectivity + Teacher+Fuel + Maintenacne)- (Cost of mobile hoarding + Cost of coverage in media + Charges collected from community)Rotaing between multiple schools, charging them nominal fee, changing the set of schools covered every quarter .. which will maximise the eyeballs as well as beneficiaries.
Can use the same infra to double up as a mobile library
Can use the same infra to go to old age home/Jail / .. 3. Toilets near Jhuggis / in busy markets .. Dozens of such ideas can come ; some will be feasible some will be not. I dont think the problem here has much to do with lack of ideas / people for executing the initiative. If Executive Sponsorship is there, things will move.
As long as generating ideas are concerned, you can always create a club within HCL that invites such ideas, screens them for finacials / impact on community. Maybe an internal blog for this purpose will suffice. All what you need is a person to act as a moderator – even that can be a rolling position moving from one division to other.
For people to own up any such initiative, I am sure there will be people willing to take on the challenge within HCL provided they are given an option of coming back after project stabalises. It can be a sabbatical with maybe half the salary, but a life enriching experience. Where there is a will there is a Way.
Gautam
Hey Vineet, The the concept of perceived "Impact" is far broad term than mentioned. Social changes and transitions are in effect a by product of creative thinking and noble judgements of the past.
Values need to set for the ways of innovation and deeper scientific conquest that has these so called broad "Impact".
I dont agree that its a black and white and obvious as you picture. Its never a black and white problem, nor is it a easy task. Its the path of brave, and only wisdom of right knowledge with proper skills, passion and huge amount of dedication that can take people there.
Management makes people think that every reform can be divided into tasks and each task handled independently. IN the modern context, my view would be to build a layer of reforms that could interact with such tasks to make it redundant.
At the end of the day, it comes to the people who are involved in these challenges that needs to have enough conquests on awareness, advertising and development.
I think organisation structure, has least to do with productivity. Why at all need any such structure. But complex systems in the nature, including human find order when many unordered systems interact. This is inert to system formation. I would suggest building hierarchy and modularity is the only best way out.
Cheers
Alex
Very Interesting and insightful. You are right when you say "It is good to have a result oriented outlook for such initiatives; however some thinking on the long term and the short term perspective will go hand-in-hand in bringing the feeling of joy, achievement and fulfillment to all the people associated with it."
The issue of impact and sustainability are important ones. But can knowledge-based quantitative models alone work?
It is a great idea to Re-Christian social initiatives as social entrepreneurs or innovators. Roger.L.Martin Dean Rotman school of Management, university of Toronto, in his article ‘The Virtue Matrix –Calculating the return on Corporate Responsibility’, (published in Harvard Business Review on CSR March 2002) has advocated a model which can be used to resolve the dilemma faced by the proponents of CSR. This model gives the empowerment to achieve a U model of development with which we can aim to achieve both depth and breadth. The only impediment is the dearth of vision. Opportunities are abound to devise programs and process that benefit the society as well as enrich the share holder. HCL is a pioneer and leader in the industry. We must take charge by taking initiative and thus create peer pressure
Value creation for masses where the government initiatives have failed , can be clubbed with wealth creation for both/any axesof your "T"model, Gramin Phone,Gramin micro credit in Bangaladesh and eChaupal in India are examples. CK Prahalad in his now famous book "…Bottom of Pyramid" has stated these.
We can actually focus on a microcosm which is at the bottom of pyramid and then think about ways to improve their lives by attacking issues which are keeping them at that level of pyramid. Most of the solutions would be non profit but few would surely pack a promise ofwealth.
e.g. Rural india is still disconnected, dis organized when it comes to information sharing.Because of this lack of information distribution and proliferation, the masses are not able to benefit from schemes such as scheduled reservations, education cess etc.Is our government ready to invest in this information proliferation, which would enable these people to harness the true potential of the taxes which are collected on their names. Thsi is a great opportunity for public private partnership. Here affirmative action is required from government and not private institutions.