1

Social Entrepreneurs and Enterprise Development

Ahmed Youssry

Sustainable Development Association Egypt, Alexandria

August, 2007

2

Table of Content

Acknowledgments

Introduction

Chapter One: Understanding Social Entrepreneurship 1.0 Introduction

1.1 Why social entrepreneurs? 1.2 Starting With Entrepreneurship 1.3 Definition of Social Entrepreneurship 1.4 The entrepreneur: an individual portrait 1.5 Boundaries of Social Entrepreneurs and Types of Social Ventures 1.6 What is so special about social entrepreneur?

1.6.1 Traits and Skills 1.6.2 Behaviour 1.6.3 Context and background

1.7 Social Entrepreneurs: A Rare Breed

Chapter Two: The Creation of Social Entrepreneurs, Process and Impact 2.0 Introduction 2.1 The process of social enterprise venture formation

2.1.1 Stage 1. The Formation of Social Sentiments. 2.1.2 Stage 2: The entrepreneurial process: 2.1.3 Support. 2.1.4 Opportunity Construction.

2.2 The Impact of Social Entrepreneurs 2.2.1 Employment Development 2.2.2 Innovation / New Goods and Services 2.2.3 Social Capital 2.2.4 Equity Promotion 2.2.5 Fulfilling Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

Chapter Three: Learning for Action 3.0 Introduction 3.1 Ashoka's Theory of Change 3.2 Making of the Social Entrepreneurs: Story of a B-school Elective Course

3.2.1 Background 3.2.2 The Roll-Out 3.2.3 Moderated Discussions: 3.2.4 Case Studies of Social Entrepreneurship Ventures 3.2.5 Developing a Project Proposal for a Social Enterprise 3.2.6 SWOT of Oneself as a “Social Entrepreneur” 3.2.7 Learning from the Course

3.3 The Blueprint Project 3.3.1 Overview 3.3.2 Implementation

3

3.3.3 Feedback 3.3.4 Recommendations 3.3.5 The Bid Network

3.5 YES Institute for Youth Social Entrepreneurship 3.5.1 Overview 3.5.2 Our Challenge: Consider this 3.5.3 Goals 3.5.4 Training Process/Methodology 3.5.5 Curriculum Snapshot 3.5.6 Evaluation Plan: Measurement/Sustainability

Chapter Four: Pubic policy puzzle

Annex 1. Bibliography 2. About YES Inc. 3. About Bib Alex 4. About YES Egypt 5. About SDA 6. About the Author

4

Dear YES family: The dream has come true! Four years after that the YES Campaign was launched in the Bibliotheca Alexandrina (BA) in 2002, we gather again in the same place for a mid-YES Campaign Forum with its leaders. YES Alexandria Forum 2007 is possible thanks to the join efforts of the Youth Employment Summit (YES) Campaign, Inc., (USA) and Bibliotheca Alexandrina, (Egypt) and the Arab Reform Forum. We want particularly thank to Dr. Ismael Serageldin and his team at BA for his permanent support as a YES Campaign Committee member and host of this forum. The YES 2007 as a mid-YES Campaign Forum, has been planned to build and strengthen the capacity of the YES Country Networks, across the globe, to undertake in country youth employment projects and programs. The goal of the Forum will be to share good practices and foster synergies among the YES Country Networks. The deliberations and activities at the Forum will centre around three identified sectors namely, Information and Communications Technologies (ICT); Integrated Rural Businesses; and Youth Employment and the Role of Social Entrepreneurship. We want to specially thank to YES Egypt for having prepared the toolkits in this three sectors which will help to build up the capacity of the YES networks on it. We hope that you will enjoy these days with the YES family and that you will share with your peers as well as you will take advantage to exchange and learn from the experts, development practitioners, donors, government and business leaders that will also join us during the forum. We expect that this forum will renew the commitments of the YES family members and our partners, to build the core competence and the capacity of the young leaders to lead a youth employment movement across their countries. In solidarity, Poonam Ahluwalia President YES Inc.

5

Dear YES Leaders: Welcome to YES Alexandria Forum 2007! This Forum is particularly important for all of the YES family since it is a mid-YES event organised primarily for the leaders and members of the YES Country Networks and other key stakeholders from across the world. We want to specially thank Bibliotheca Alexandrina (BA) and YES Egypt team for the great support we have received to organize this forum. Without their support this forum would not have been possible. YES Alexandria 2007 intends to build capacities and support for the leaders of the YES Campaign in different parts of the world in order to develop strategy and programs for youth employment and entrepreneurship. It is very important for all of us to put it into perspective that this Forum is the result of the conclusions and recommendations of the YES Coordinators Workshop in Kenya and that it is the first-ever capacity-building forum for YES Coordinators. Its key objectives are: 1. To frame and move forward the strategic goals of YES Inc; 2. To train and develop capacities of YES Coordinators and other

participating youth in three strategic areas for entrepreneurship development: Information and Communications Technologies, Integrated Rural Businesses, and Youth Employment and the role of Social Entrepreneurship .

3. To strengthen the YES Networks by building capacity in three thematic tracks: Community Building, Program Development, and YES Programs; and

4. To build and strengthen institutional capacity by fostering linkages and synergies between the YES Coordinators and YES Inc.

We are confident that after YES Alexandria 2007, the YES Campaign leaders will be ready to move forward it to the next phase at the global, regional and national levels! Welcome to a new era at YES! Warm regards, Dacil Acevedo Riquelme Global Networks Coordinator YES Inc.

6

Dear YES Family and Partners, In September 2002, the historic city of Alexandria has witnessed our launch of the YES Campaign with the gathering of 1600 youth leaders from 120 countries embracing the same values of unity, and adhering to a global youth vision. Hundreds of networks have been strongly established, thousands of plans have been effectively set, and hard work has taken off in almost all parts of the world. Now, 5 years have passed the launch, and the YES family is coming together to review measures, evaluate actions, and set more goals to meet; all under the umbrella of better livelihood for the world youth, who make roughly 1.2 billion according to the UN's World Youth Report 2006. That enormous human force is the fuel of the future, and the driven force for a brighter tomorrow. The future of the world lies in their hands. It is truly my happiness to welcome you all again on the lands of the beautiful Alexandria, my hometown, and the birthplace of the YES Campaign. It is with so much sincere gratitude and honest appreciation, we extend our heart-felt thanking to the prestigious Bibliotheca Alexandrina, pioneered by the legendary Dr. Ismail Serageldin, that gave, and still giving enormous support, guidance, and advice to the movement. The YES Campaign would not have been globally recognized, if it were not for the excellent management of Poonam Ahluwalia, YES Campaign President, and her very qualified team, and partners from all over the globe. YES Egypt has recently celebrated the 4th anniversary on the establishment of the Sustainable Development Association (SDA), the NGO which was co-founded by the YES Egypt Team during the very first months of the Campaign, acting as its legal entity, and currently operating a great number of local, regional and international youth projects. The SDA has been committed to a doctrine of democracy and leadership rotation, highly manifested, and successfully experienced in moving the chairing from Mr. Abdallah Sobeih, after 4 fruitful years, to myself. Many thanks go to the BA Team, YES Team, and our local, regional and global partners, YES we strive to solve the problem, YES we hope for better world YES we work together Haythem Kamel YES Middle East and North Africa Region Coordinator

7

Introduction

The Term social entrepreneurs became recently a phenomenon in the scholars' researches, after Dr. Yunus's Nobel Prize, many people became very optimistic about the future of the world's development depending on the social entrepreneurs; some refer to it as the way of how to eliminate poverty and unemployment. So what is the definition of social entrepreneurs? The answer to this question is the main focus of chapter one. The definition of social entrepreneurs, their place in the society, the differences between social entrepreneurs and social activists, the boundaries of social entrepreneurs and the skills that distinguish them as social entrepreneurs. Although this is not the purpose of this toolkit, the real purpose is to encourage the readers to create social ventures that support social entrepreneurs, by understanding the conditions that create social entrepreneurs, their needs and their effects. Readers will be able to help their societies by encouraging social entrepreneurship . The focus of the second chapter is the process of social enterprise venture formation, the impact of social entrepreneurs in: the society, the employment development level, the innovation of new services, the enlargement of the social capital, the equity promotion and the fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). After finishing the second chapter, readers should have theoretically the ability to foster and encourage social entrepreneurship. Since in practice there are some differences in the third chapter, readers will find case studies for social entrepreneurship creation ventures, such as Ashoka, B-school Elective Course and Blueprint Workshops. The fourth and last chapter is left blank, for the YES leaders´ recommendations in occasion of their mid-term YES Campaign forum in YES Alexandria 2007.

8

Chapter One Understanding Social Entrepreneurship

9

Introduction The first chapter of this toolkit is dedicated to explain the terms and concepts of social entrepreneurship, starting with the global phenomenon about the ordinary individuals doing extraordinary things, such as last year’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus. Then we introduce the term entrepreneur explaining the historical background behind it, in order to understand better the definition of social entrepreneur and finding their place in the society. We encourage you to read carefully this chapter, to better understand how to create social entrepreneurs in the next chapter. 1.1 Why social entrepreneurs?1

The nascent field of social entrepreneurship is growing rapidly and attracting increased attention from many sectors. The term itself is shown up frequently in the media, is referenced by public officials, has become common on university campuses, and informs the strategy of several prominent social sector organizations, including Ashoka and the Schwab and Skoll foundations. The reasons behind the popularity of social entrepreneurship are many. On the most basic level, there’s something inherent that is interesting and appealing about entrepreneurs and the stories of why and how they do what they do. People are attracted to social entrepreneurs like last year’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus for many of the same reasons that they find business entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs so compelling. These extraordinary people come up with brilliant ideas and against all the odds succeed at creating new products and services that dramatically improve people’s lives. But interest in social entrepreneurship transcends the phenomenon of popularity and fascination with people. Social entrepreneurship signals the imperative to drive social change, and it is that potential payoff, with its lasting, transformational benefit to society, that sets the field and its practitioners apart. Although the potential benefits offered by social entrepreneurship are clear to many of those promoting and funding these activities, the actual definition of what social entrepreneurs do to produce this order of magnitude return, is less clear. In fact, we would argue that the definition of social entrepreneurship today is anything but clear. As a result, social entrepreneurship has become so inclusive that it now has an immense tent into which all manner of socially beneficial activities fit. 1.2 Starting With Entrepreneurship Any definition of the term “social entrepreneurship” must start with the word “entrepreneurship.” The word “social” simply modifies entrepreneurship. If entrepreneurship doesn’t have a clear meaning, then modifying it with social won’t accomplish much, either. The word entrepreneurship is a mixed blessing. On the positive side, it connotes a special, innate ability to sense and act on opportunity, combining out-of-the-box thinking with a unique brand of determination to create or bring about something new

1 (Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition, Roger L. Martin & Sally Osberg, 2007)

10

to the world. On the negative side, entrepreneurship is an ex post term, because entrepreneurial activities require a passage of time before their true impact is evident. Interestingly, we don’t call someone who exhibits all of the personal characteristics of an entrepreneur – opportunity sensing, out-of-the-box thinking, and determination – yet who failed miserably in his or her venture an entrepreneur; we call him or her a business failure. Even someone like Bob Young, of Red Hat Software fame, is called a “serial entrepreneur” only after his first success; i.e., all of his prior failures are dubbed the work of a serial entrepreneur only after the occurrence of his first success. The problem with ex post definitions is that they tend to be ill defined. It’s simply harder to get your arms around what’s unproven. An entrepreneur can certainly claim to be one, but without at least one notch on the belt, the self-proclaimed will have a tough time persuading investors to place bets. Those investors, in turn, must be willing to assume greater risk as they assess the credibility of would-be entrepreneurs and the potential impact of formative ventures. Even with these considerations, we believe that the ownership for the term social entrepreneurship requires wrestling with what we actually mean by it. Is it simply alertness to opportunity? Creativity? Determination? Although these and other behavioural characteristics are part of the story and certainly provide important clues for prospective investors, they are not the whole story. Such descriptors are also used to describe inventors, artists, corporate executives, and other societal actors. 1.3 Definition of Social Entrepreneurship 2 Despite the agreement that social entrepreneurship is an emerging field, there exists no agreed upon definition3. Many attempts to define social entrepreneurship start with exploring the term’s use, going back to French economist Jean-Baptiste Say in the early 19th century, who defined an entrepreneur as a person who creates value by shifting “economic resources out of an area of lower and into an area of higher productivity and greater yield ”4. Most influential was Joseph Schumpeter in defining the ‘Unternehmer’ (entrepreneur) as an innovative force for economic progress, important in the process of ‘creative destruction’ and therefore as a change agent, a term which is used in many modern definitions of social entrepreneurship5. While there are many different definitions of entrepreneur, the relatively new term social entrepreneur is even less clearly defined and often varies from country to country and author to author6. One of the most widely cited definitions in the academic literature is the one from a renowned scholar in the field of social entrepreneurship: A social entrepreneur is a change agent who:

• “Adopts a mission to create and sustain social values • Recognizes and relentlessly pursues new opportunities to serve that mission • Engages in a process of continuous innovation, adaptation, and learning • Acts boldly without being limited by resources currently at hand, and

2 (Is social entrepreneurship important for economic development policies ?, Jürgen Nagler, 2007) 3 (Austin et al., 2006, p.1) 4 (Martin and Osberg, 2007, p.2) 5(Schumpeter, 1962/2005, p.3, Dees et al., 2001) 6(Schumpeter, 1962/2005, p.3, Dees et al., 2001)

11

• Exhibits heightened accountability to the constituencies served and the outcomes created.”7.

Noteworthy is also a shift in the focus of social entrepreneurs away from the non profit sector, traditionally in charity and philanthropic activities, towards entrepreneurial private-sector oriented business activities. While some authors such as Dees et. Al (2001) and Bornstein (2004) still see the social entrepreneur mainly in the non-profit sector, most of the studies in recent years highlight that the boundaries between non-profit and for-profit vanish8. Leadbeater’s (1997) diagram illustrates how t he social-entrepreneur sector overlaps with the public, private and voluntary sectors:

Figure 1.1 : Sources of the Social Entrepreneur Sector (Leadbeater, 1997, p.10) The more modern definition of social entrepreneurship incorporates the enterprise orientation with social objectives and social ownership, which means that the social enterprise is typically accountable to community stakeholders rather than financial investment shareholders9: “A social enterprise is any business venture created for a social purpose – mitigating/reducing a social problem or a market failure – and to generate social value while operating with the financial discipline, innovation and determination of a private sector business.” Social enterprises lie at the crossroads between non-profit and business organization as shown in the following illustration of the spectrum of hybrid organizations that includes key features of different types of enterprises.

7(Gregory Dees et al. 2001, pp. 4–5, cited in Soderborg, 2004) 8 (OECD, 2000, p.8, OECD, 1998, p.116, Alter, 2006, p.3) 9(Alter, 2006, p.5)

12

Figure 2: Typology of Social Entrepreneurs (Alter, 2006, p.7) 1.4 The e ntrepreneur: an individual portrait10 Some seventy years ago, Schumpeter (1934: 93-94), the patron saint of all entrepreneurs, depicted the motives of the entrepreneur as follows: First of all there is the dream and the will to found a private kingdom, usually, though not necessarily, also a dynasty. … Then there is the will to conquer: the impulse to fight, to prove oneself superior to others, to succeed for the sake, not of the fruits of success, but of success itself. From this aspect, economic action becomes akin to sport… The financial result is a secondary consideration, or, at all events, mainly valued as an index of success and as a symptom of victory, the displaying of which very often is more important as a motive of large expenditure than the wish for the consumers’ goods themselves. … Finally, there is the joy of creating, of getting things done, or simply of exercising one’s energy and ingenuity. ... Our type seeks out difficulties, changes in order to change, delights in ventures. Romantic as it may seem at first glance . Schumpeter’s portrait of entrepreneurial motives captures essential facets of entrepreneurship that mainstream economics still grapples with. Schumpeter’s core contention, that entrepreneurs do not seek greater wealth for the sake of increasing consumption seems at odds with conventional depictions of economic agents. This seeming contradiction is all the more evident when one considers the alleged motives of ‘the joy of creating… delights in venturing’, which, one should bear in mind, are related to economic activity in the market, not recreation and leisure. Recent evidence suggests, however, that Schumpeter might be right. First, entrepreneurs may not be motivated primarily by pecuniary incentives. Hamilton (2000) finds that in the United States, median entrepreneurs’ earnings after 10 years in business are 35 percent less than the predicted alternative wage on a paid job of the same duration. Hamilton’s use of a self-selection model shows that it is not the case that low-ability workers become entrepreneurs; if anything, the evidence shows that higher-ability workers are more likely to enter into self-employment. Moskowitz and Vissing-Jørgensen (2002) and Kerins, J. Smith and R. Smith (2004) provide evidence that entrepreneurs forego financial benefits in order to engage in entrepreneurship. Amit et al. (2001) compared Canadian entrepreneurs with senior managers who decided not to start ventures in the high-technology sector. They found that for entrepreneurs' decision to start a new venture wealth attainment was

10 (The Social Dimensions of Entrepreneurship, Amir N. Licht and Jordan I. Siegel, 2005)

13

significantly less important relative to an aggregate of ten other decision dimensions (specifically: vision, stability, power, lifestyle, leadership, innovation, independence, ego, contribution, and challenge). 1.5 Boundaries of Social entrepreneur and Types of Social Ventures11 In defining social entrepreneurship, it is also important to establish boundaries and provide examples of activities that may be highly meritorious but do not fit our definition. Failing to identify boundaries would leave the term social entrepreneurship so wide open as to be essentially meaningless. There are two primary forms of socially valuable activity that we believe need to be distinguished from social entrepreneurship. The first type of social venture is social service provision. In this case, a courageous and committed individual identifies an unfortunate stable equilibrium – AIDS orphans in Africa, for example – and sets up a program to address it – for example, a school for the children to ensure that they are cared for and educated. The new school would certainly help the children it serves and may very well enable some of them to break free from poverty and transform their lives. But unless it is designed to achieve large scale o r is so compelling as to launch legions of imitators and replicators, it is not likely to lead to a new superior equilibrium. These types of social service ventures never break out of their limited frame: Their impact remains constrained, their service area stays confined to a local population, and their scope is determined by whatever resources they are able to attract. These ventures are inherently vulnerable, which may mean disruption or loss of service to the populations they serve. Millions of such organizations exist around the world – well intended, noble in purpose, and frequently exemplary in execution – but they should not be confused with social entrepreneurship. It would be possible to reformulate a school for AIDS orphans as social entrepreneurship. But that would require a plan by which the school itself would spawn an entire network of schools and secure the basis for its ongoing support. The outcome would be a stable new equilibrium whereby even if one school closed; there would be a robust system in place through which AIDS orphans would routinely receive an education. The difference between the two types of ventures – one social entrepreneurship and the other social service – isn’t in the initial entrepreneurial contexts or in many of th e personal characteristics of the founders, but rather in the outcomes. Imagine that Andrew Carnegie had built only one library rather than conceiving the public library system that today serves untold millions of American citizens. Carnegie’s single library would have clearly benefited the community it served. But it was his vision of an entire system of libraries creating a permanent new equilibrium – one ensuring access to information and knowledge for all the nation’s citizens – that anchors his reputation as a social entrepreneur.

11 (Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition, Roger L. Martin & Sally Osberg, 2007)

14

A second class of social venture is social activism. In this case, the motivator of the activity is the same – an unfortunate and stable equilibrium. And several aspects of the actor’s characteristics are the same – inspiration, creativity, courage, and fortitude. What is different is the nature of the actor’s action orientation?. Instead of taking direct action, as the social entrepreneur would, the social activist attempts to create change through indirect action, by influencing others – governments, NGOs, consumers, workers, etc. – to take action. Social activists may or may not create ventures or organizations to advance the changes they seek. Successful activism can yield substantial improvements to existing systems and even result in a new equilibrium, but the strategic nature of the action is distinct in its emphasis on influence rather than on direct action. Why not call these people social entrepreneurs? It wouldn’t be a tragedy. But such people have long had a name and an exalted tradition: the tradition of Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, and Vaclav Havel. They are social activists. Calling them something entirely new – i.e., social entrepreneurs – and thereby confusing the general public, who already know what a social activist is, would not be helpful to the cause of either social activists or social entrepreneurs.

Figure 1.2 "Pure forms of social engagement" Source: (Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition, Roger L. Martin & Sally Osberg, 2007)

15

1.6 What is so special about social entrepreneur?12 In very particular terms, social entrepreneurs- also known as social entrepreneurial leaders and civic entrepreneurs – are "ordinary people doing extraordinary things"13, yet we still do not know much about them (Prabhu, 1999). 1.6.1 Traits and skills Although research on social entrepreneurs is still scarce, anecdotal evidence suggests a few distinguishing traits and skills. Thompson, Alvy et al. (2000) suggest that vision and fortitude are necessa ry traits to implement a social venture. Drayton (2002) describes social entrepreneurs as "creative individuals with powerful new, system change idea" (pg. 123). Other characteristics include the ability to recognize opportunities. A collaborative leadership style, a long-term community-oriented motivation, a teamwork capability (Morse & Dudley 2002). Finally, Boschee (1998) considers candour, passion, clarity of purpose, commitment, courage, values, customer focus, willingness to plan, ability to think like business, strategy, and flexibility, required in social entrepreneurs as critical success factors to successfully embark on social entrepreneurial activities. However, many of these characteristics may not be exclusive to social entrepreneurs but may very well be shared by non-entrepreneurs. In addition, social entrepreneurs who share the same traits may very well differ in the social impact of their initiatives. Hence, Drayton (2002) claims that the factor that distinguishes the average from the successful entrepreneur is "entrepreneurial quality" (pg. 124). Entrepreneurial quality is a very special and scarce trait. It is much more than altruistic motivation or much more than previously mentioned traits. It is the relentless motivation to change the whole society shared by only a very small percentage of the population. 1.6.2 Behaviour We still know very little about the content and behaviour of entrepreneurial initiatives aimed at social objectives. The main sources so far for enhancing our knowledge are foundations such as Ashoka or Schwab Foundations, which provides support to Social Entrepreneurs initiatives. Having worked with hundreds of social entrepreneurs, these organizations have provided descriptive account of their characteristics, motivations, and experiences (Bonbright, 1997). Nevertheless, a more rigorous approach is needed to map Social Entrepreneurship process. So far, several behavioural attributes have been associated with Social Entrepreneurs: courage to accept social criticism, less failure-anxiety, receptivity to other feelings, perseverance, communication skills, ability to appear trustworthy, creativity, ability to satisfy customers' needs, goal oriented, and working capacity (Mcleod, 1997; Prabhu, 1999). However, similar attributes may equally apply to for-profit entrepreneurial behavior, with one exception receptivity to other' feelings, or put differently, empathy. According to the Webster's dictionary, Empathy is defined as the ability to share in others' emotions and feelings. Although it is not clear whether empathy is a trait (dispositional empathy) or a behaviour (situational empathy), we consider empathy as a cognitive and emotional antecedent in creating social entrepreneurial intention.

12

(Social entrepreneurs" how intentions to create a social enterprise get formed, Johanna Mair & Ernesto Noboa, 2003) 13 (LaBarre Fishman et al., 2001:84)

16

1.6.3 Context and background In addition to traits and behaviour, context and background are important aspects to understand entrepreneurs and their initiatives (Bird, 1988). The background of the Social Entrepreneur is critical for triggering the desirability to lunch social enterprise (Parbhu 1999). "I was raised I the spirit of charity and giving". I grew sensitive to other people's feelings", and "I felt uneasy about the problem of the poor" are typical responses of social entrepreneurs that indicate that social, moral and educational background play a vital role in forming entrepreneurial intentions aimed at fulfilling a social objective (Bonbirgh, 1997). Another aspect of background, i.e. previous entrepreneurial experiences (Parbhu 1999), is also central to understanding Social Entrepreneurs as a process. Such experience facilitates self-beliefs –social entrepreneurs' perceived capability to act social entrepreneurial- and the creation of supporting networks. Both self-efficacy and social support "enable" the entrepreneur to view the social venture as some thing feasible and therefore are important elements in the process of forming social entrepreneurial intentions. Social entrepreneurs' context, i.e. their involvement with social sector or their exposure to social issues, nor only allows them to recognize social opportunities, but also seems to turn them into altruistic citizens unsatisfied with the statue quo; loyal to their values and philosophy; motivated to act socially responsibly; who value other social entrepreneurs' lifestyle, respect, and success (Parbhu 1999). Overall, we argue that background and context explain a large part of social entrepreneurs' enhanced level of loyalty to their values and philosophy, which is typically associated with an elevated level of moral judgment; we assume that moral judgment is a relevant parameter in distinguishing social from traditional entrepreneurs. Needless to say, we don't imply that for-profit entrepreneurs are incapable of moral judgment. We are only suggesting that moral judgment acts as a discriminating variable at the moment of taking the decision to become social entrepreneur. Thus, we consider moral judgment as a cognitive antecedent of social entrepreneurial intention. In sum, anecdotal evidence suggests that background and context of social entrepreneurs has an important effect on the development of certain skills and/or behaviours. We suggest that empathy and entrepreneurial quality may induce entrepreneurs to combine resources in innovative ways to pursue opportunities at the creation of organizations and/or practices that yield and sustain social benefits. Furthermore we argued that moral judgment is a discriminating variable aimed social and traditional entrepreneurs at the moment of making career choices. 1.7 Social Entrepreneurs: A Rare Breed 14 Social entrepreneurship describes a set of behaviors that are exceptional. These behaviors should be encouraged and rewarded in those who have the capabilities and temperament for this kind of work. We could use many more of them. Should everyone aspire to be a social entrepreneur? No. Not every social sector leader is well suited to being entrepreneurial. The same is true in business. Not every business leader is an entrepreneur in the sense that Say, Schumpeter, Drucker, and Stevenson had in mind. While we might wish for more entrepreneurial behavior in both sectors, society has a need for different leadership types and styles. Social

14 (The meaning of "social entrepreneurs", J. Gregory Dees, 1998)

17

entrepreneurs are one special breed of leader, and they should be recognized as such. This definition preserves their distinctive status and assures that social entrepreneurship is not treated lightly. We need social entrepreneurs to help us find new avenues toward social improvement as we enter the next century.

18

Chapter Two The Creation of Social Entrepreneurs: Process and Impact

19

Introduction After reviewing the definitions and the characteristics of social entrepreneurs in the previous chapter, now we are about to create social entrepreneurs. To be honest, we are not going to pro vide you with a clear list of steps that tells you how to create social entrepreneurs, as there are several approaches for creating social entrepreneurs and they are diverse between countries according to the dominate cultural and social system, but what we can do, simply is to tell you the path for creating social entrepreneurship with an explanation of the process and the common propositions. Then to encourage you to promote more social entrepreneurs in your country, we will go through the impact of social entrepreneurship in relation to employment creation, services, social capital, equity promotion and the Millennium Development Goals. Then it is up to you, if you think it is important to create social entrepreneurs in your country or not. Wait a moment, we think it is too early to say this…, let́ s finish the toolkit first. 2.1 The process of social enterprise venture formation15 With his theory of planned behavior (TBP) the psychologist Ajzen claimed that intentions explain human behavior in specific contexts with a high degree of accuracy (Ajzen.1991). After an extensive review of prior research, Kim and Hunter (1993) found, through meta-analysis. Those behavioral intentions are reliable moderator of the attitude – behavior relationship. TPB has been successfully tested in several contexts (see Van Ryn, Lytel et al., 1996; hrubes, Ajzen, et al., 2001). Ajzen (2001) claimed that a sufficient number of investigations have demonstrated the validity of the theory. In the entrepreneurship context, intentions – defined as “degree of commitment toward some future target behavior “ (Kruger,1993:6)- have also been identified as an important property of emerging organizations (Katz and Gartner,1998:Katz 1993) and a reliable predictor of new venture creation (Kruger ,1993). With out them, the creation of a new venture is highly improvable (Kruger, 2000a). Shapero and Sokol’s (1982) work has been particularly influential in exploring antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions. These authors proposed that perce ptions (i.e. perceived venture feasibility and desirability), in combination with a propensity to act, influence behavior through intentions (Shapero and Sokol, 1982). A number of influence entrepreneurship scholars (Scott and Twomy,1988; Lenard ,1992: Kruger,1993) have examined entrepreneurial intention formation by building on Shapero and Soklo’s model .

15 HOW INTINTIONS TO CREATE A SOCIAL VENTURE ARE FORMED A CASE STUDY (Johanna Mair & Ernesto Noboa) June 2005

20

Norris Krueger, for example, has pushed this stream of research forward by presenting a refined version of the original model (Krueger, 1993; Krueger and Brazeal, 1994; Krueger 2000a: Krueger, Reilly et al 2000b). See figure 1 for an illustration. Comparing the TBP with the Shapero -Krueger model, Krueger et al. found strong support for the latter and illustrated the model’s superior ability to predict entrepreneurial intentions ( Krueger, Reilly et al .,200b).

Figure 2.1. Model of entrepreneurial intentions adopted from Krueger and Brazeal (1994) Perception of desirability Perception of desirability is the personal bias towards ventures perceived as more desirable, a bias that grows from the perceived personal consequence of the entrepreneurial outcomes (e.g. good vs. bad), type of venture (high tech vs. low tech) (Krueger and Brazeal, 1994), and the level of support in the environment (e.g. family, peers, colleagues, mentors, others) (Shapero and Sokol, 1982: Scout and Twomey, 1988). Research has shown that perception of desirability is positively related to entrepreneurial intentions (Kreueger 1993). Pe rception of Feasibility Perception of feasibility is the entrepreneur’s belief in his/her ability to put together the required human, social and financial resources for the new venture (Shapero and Sokol, 1982). That belief doesn’t come from the prior experience as such, but from the resulting expertise (Reuber, Dyke et al., 1990) which helps entrepreneurs to over come potential pitfalls, such as misreading the market or forming unrealistic expectations (MacMilan, Block et al., 1986). Expertise developed from prior experience is manifested in the entrepreneur’s perceived self-efficacy (i.e. the belief in one’s abilities to plan and execute the path required to produce certain outcomes) and social capital (i.e. the social network which, resting on trust and cooperation, is capable of providing the reso urces to implement a new venture, such as business incubators, targeted small business programs, business professionals and established institutions and agencies) (Starr and Fondas, 1992). Research has shown that perceptions of feasibility are positively related to entrepreneurial intentions (Krueger, 1993).

21

Propensity to act Propensity to act is the innate tendency to act, and felt with varied intensity among different people. For this reason, it influences intentions not only directly, but also indirectly (Krueger 1993). When propensity to act is low, entrepreneurial intentions are unlikely to develop, and perceptions of desirability become sole predictors of intentions (Krueger 1993). On the other hand, when propensity to act is high, the quantity of prior entrepreneurial experience in addition to perceptions of desirability and feasibility directly influences intentions (Krueger 1993). Maria Elena Ordónez : Arcandina Foundation : Maria Elena Ordónez, became aware of two seemingly unrelated problems and developed the means to address them in parallel. She observed that ecuatorin children lacked high-quality educational television programs and noticed that despite severe environmental problems in her country, the public at large did not feel accountable. In response she developed Arcandina, an innovate initiative that entertains and educates children (audience) through high quality TV programs and other communication channels (distribution channels) about the need to protect our environmental content. Arcandina – short for ARCA ANDINA (ANDEAN ARK) – first aired in Ecuador in December 1960, as the first educational television show promoting environment awareness and conversation. The show immerses children in fantasy world in which Muppets – representing endangered species of the Andean region of south America – embark in a boat, the “Andean park” , on a weakly mission to protect their habitat . The Ark –capturing the essence of the familiar biblical story of Noah’s Ark-is the means to save the animals o f the Andean region from destruction the protagonist Muppets are the jaguar (jagui) , the sea lion (Cory, named after coral), and the toucan (tucan). A forth Muppet, the green guardian –a monster like computer, expert who keeps important files that contains mother nature’s secrets – joined Arcandina’s heroes in their journey to protect our environment and species from destruction , garbage, and pollution. They all live in the Ark. where they receive information about environment destruction and organize and carry out rescue missions. Finally to make the show more entertaining, the muppets fight villains who attempt to destroy the environment. The villains ‘leader is an avaricious Maximus, a greedy monster that loves to accumulate money and feeds on environmental destruction . He partners with his right hand man, Ratasura – a rat loves garbage- and other ruffian followers to antagonize the muppets. Ratasura became the children’s favorite character and Arcandina’s most innovative feature, as-despite being a shameless rat who admits loving garbage-he does all the naughty things that make children laugh (including environmentally destructive behavior) while gradually improving his manners under the influence of the thoughtful and convincing arguments of Arcandina’s heroes.

22

An overview over the model explained in the case above. As illustrated in figure 2 .1, the process of how Ordónez developed the intention to create a social venture evolved in two chronological distinct stages, each lasting a few years. In the first stage, Ordónez formed social sentiments that provided the needed base of subsequently developing intentions to create social venture. in the second stage, her willpower, the support of she gathered, and the way she constructed an opportunity allowed her to develop perceptions of desirability and feasibility , as well as to strengthen her propensity to create Arcandina (the social venture). In the following section we present the model of how social enterprises form the intention to create a social venture and drive proposition.

Figure2.2. Model of social entrepreneurial intentions 2.1.1 Stage 1. The Formation of Social Sentiments. Sentiments-including perceptions, motives and emotions, thinking and learning and complex combination of opinions and feeling that’s lead to action and judgment, and focus the individual on the pursuit of relativity permanents ends (Asch, 1957). They accidentally develop from a strong relationship with someone or something and are biased by the individual’s prior experiences. Once developed, their strength is manifested in the strong devotion individual develop towards, for example other people or ideas (Asch, 1957). In summary, sentiments control individual’s behavior, energize them towards what has become their attention (e.g. a particular social issue), and guide their long-term individual actions. In social entrepreneurship context, social sentiments seem to turn individuals into citizens who are dissatisfied with the status quo, loyal to their values and philosophy and motivated to act in socially responsible manner (Prablu, 1999).

23

In Maria Elena Ordónez case, the researchers found that social sentiments are formed from the complex combination of a key relationship (her relationship with nature), and predisposition traits (her capacity to experience and instill empathy and her high degree of moral judgment). Predisposition traits are those that naturally motivate the individual to take into consideration other people's needs or interests. Finally, the formation of social feelings does not automatically imply the creation of social venture. Individuals with strong social feelings may act in various sectors and in a wide variety of professions (e.g. doctors) and vocations (e.g. religious or educational). However, social feelings seem to be an important element in the process of formation of intentions to create a social venture. As a summary, the decission to create a social venture is influenced by the early formation of social feelings, which are originated by a key relationship with someone or someth ing (external factor), and predisposition traits (internal factors ). 2.1.2 Stage 2: The entrepreneurial process Willpower. The data revealed that willpower, defined as energetic determination and ,according to Ghoshal and Bruch , "the most powerful force of human behaviour" (2003: 51), is closely related to propensity to act . Willpower can be identified in an individual when he/she goals . Ghoshal and Bruch (2003: 51) described it as " a deep personal attachment to an intention". It's power is such that it moves an individual to act, despite adversity, lack of motivation, low energy levels, or alternative opportunities. Furthermore, willpower to inspire the individual in the face of difficulties (Ghoshal and Bruch , 2003 ) . In the case of Maria Elena Ordónez, we found that willpower resulted from the complex combination of motivation (create social impact, reach more people, financial, and desire for social change) with action- related traits (her tendency to do things her way, adaptation skills, and long term focus). In addition, Maria Elena Ordónez displayed particular action –oriented traits that made her feel capable of accomplishing the undertaking. Research entrepreneurs reflects that they possess skills already attributed to traditional entrepreneurs (McLeod, 1997: Boschee , 1998 ; Parbhu , 1999 ; Morse and Dudley , 2002 ), which increase their level of willpower . Finally, while an individual who acts with willpower will not necessarily create a social venture, we argue that willpower is an important variable in understanding the process by which the intention to create a social venture develops. In conclusion, a social entrepreneur's propensity to act is influenced by the display of willpower and it is determined by the combination of the type of motivations that social entrepreneurs experience and action-oriented traits that make them feel capable of pursuing their initiatives.

1.1.3 Support Our data showed that the support – defined as access to human and material resources – that social entrepreneur are able to gather affects their perception of feasibility only after they have evaluated the amount and type of support available for the venture. In the case of Maria Elena Ordónez, we found that support must occur at two distinct levels (individual and organizational) if it is to have a positive influence on the social entrepreneur's perceptions of the feasibility of the venture.

24

The level of support that social entrepreneurs obtain from stakeholders will depend on the stock of resources available in their social network, and on their ability to enhance that stock by influencing stakeholders' judgment of the venture and thus also their willingness to invest. Again, we see access to human social and material resources as a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition to develop intentions to create a social venture. Then, the perceived feasibility of a social venture is influenced by the amount and type of support the social entrepreneur is able to gather at the individual and organizational level. 2.1.4 Opportunity Construction Opportunities can be searched for they can be discovered. Both types of opportunity recognition require prior experience or knowledge. One does not search for what one does not know, and one can not discover what one's mind can not perceive. Krueger (2000a) proposed a third way to recognize opportunities. He claimed that potential entrepreneurs do not discover or search for opportunities Rather, they construct them: "opportunities are thus very much in the eyes of the beholder"(Krueger 2000a:6) once the individual perceive the opportunity, he/she will experience perceptions of desirability – among other factors – if the venture meets personal preferences ( e.g. high versus low tech ) (Krueger and Brazeal , 1994 ) . In the case of Maria Elena Ordónez , we found that the opportunity was constructed by combining prior experience and salient events, her initiative – Arcandina- initially consisted of a television program for children to educate them on environmental issues. In the process of constructing Arcandina , Ordónez combined three different elements . She put together the potential of television as a medium to reach her audience, her love for children, and Ecuador's environmental problems. Only after she had interiorized the fact that she wanted to devote herself to each one of these three elements – an event that occurred during her college years – she was ready to combine them and envision Arcandina Once Arcandina was constructed in her mind, she automatically felt the desire to create the venture, and took all the necessary steps to eventually (more than ten years later) launch her television program. Finally, while Important, opportunity construction is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for the intention to create a social venture.The perceived desirability of a social venture is influenced by the combination of a social opportunity. The construction of a social opportunity is determined by a combination of the social entrepreneur's prior experience and salient events that help him/her to recognize it. 2.2 The Impact of Social Entrepreneurs16 The importance of entrepreneurship in general and social entrepreneurship in particular is often overlooked17. This section argues in the next five paragraphs that social entrepreneurship is important to economic development policies because it can play a vital role to the progress of societies and deliver vital value to societal and economic development. 2.2.1 Employment Development

16 (Is social entrepreneurship important for economic development policies ?, Jürgen Nagler, 2007) 17(Martin and Osberg, 2007)

25

The first major economic value that social entrepreneurship creates is the most obvious one because it is shared with entrepreneurs and businesses alike: job and employment creation. Although the academic literature does not provide recent data on how many people are employed in social enterprises in a multi-country context, a study from the John Hopkins University from 1998 on the percentage of people employed in the non-profit sector in 13 countries can function as a proxy to illustrate that the number is significant. As figure 2.3 sh ows, it ranges from one to seven percent in the selected countries.18:

Figure 2.3: Employment in the non-profit sector (OECD, 1998, p.114) A second dimension of employment development is almost unique to social enterprises; social enterprises provide employment opportunities and job training to segments of society at an employment disadvantage, such as the long-term unemployed, the disabled, the homeless, at-risk youth and gender-discriminated women19. Some social enterprises act as an “ intermediate between unemployment and the open labor market”20. Re-integration of disadvantaged groups into the labor market is both socially and financially beneficial for the community at large21. In the case of Prof. Yunus and the Grameen Bank, the economic situation of six million disadvantaged women micro -entrepreneurs were improved 22 . 2.2.2 Innovation / New Goods and Services Social enterprises develop and apply innovation important to social and economic development and develop new goods and services. As the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) states, “social-purpose enterprises … bring new responses to unmet social needs can be measured as the

18 (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development OECD, 1998, p.114) 19 (Alter, 2006, p.28) 20 (OECD, 2003, p.114) 21(OECD, 2000, p.50) 22 (Nobel Committee, 2006)

26

provision of new goods and services that are complementary to those delivered by the public and private sectors and accessible to a greater number of citizens”23. Issues addressed include some of the biggest societal problems such as HIV /Aids, mental ill-health, illiteracy, crime and drug abuses which, importantly, are confronted in innovative ways24. An example showing that these new approaches in some cases are transferable to the public sector is the Brazilian social entrepreneur Veronica Khosa, who developed a home -based care model for AIDS patients which later changed government health policy25. The OECD sees these new kinds of organizations as “hotbeds of ideas and experiments, and they are able to get innovative policies adopted at the central, regional or local government levels”26. 2.2.3 Social Capital Next to economic capital one of the most important values created by social entrepreneurship is social capital. Although the term social capital again is not clearly defined, it is usually understood as “ the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition"27. To Leadbeater (1997), social capital is the most important form of capital created by social entrepreneurs because economic partnerships require shared values, trust and a culture of cooperation which is all part of social capital28. As examples he mentions the success of the German and Japanese economies, which have their roots in long-term relationships and the ethics of cooperation, in both essential innovation and industrial development. The World Bank also sees social capital as critical for poverty alleviation and sustainable human and economic development29. Hasan (2005) mentions the Grameen Bank again, along with several other Asian examples, and concludes with the statement that “existent bonding social capital within groups has been reinforced by bridging/linking social capital catalysed by social entrepreneurs”30. Figure 2.4 illustrates the “virtuous circle of social capital”, starting with the initial endowment of social capital by the social entrepreneur. Building up a network of trust and cooperation and getting more partners involved enables access to physical (e.g. buildings), financial and human capital. Organizational capital is created, and, when the social enterprise is successful, more social capital such as in the form of a re -opened hospital is created31:

23 (OECD, 2000, p.50) 24 (Leadbeater, 1997, p.22) 25 (Bornstein, 2003, p.183) 26 (OECD, 1998, p.122) 27 (Bourdieu, 1983, p.241) 28 (Leadbeater, 1997, p.23-24) 29 (World Bank, 2004) 30 (Hasan, 2005, p.13) 31 (Leadbeater, 1997, p.67-70)

27

Figure 2.4: The virtuous cycle of social capital (Leadbeater, 1997, p.68) 2.2.4 Equity Promotion Another aspect is that social entrepreneurship fosters a more equitable society which is an objective for most economic development policies32. Complementing the equity promoting activities of public agencies and NGOs, social enterprises address social issues and try to achieve ongoing sustainable impact through their social mission rather than purely profit-maximization33. Again Yunus’s Grameen Bank and its support for disadvantaged women is an example of how social entrepreneurs support equity-promoting policies. Other examples include reintegrating disadvantaged groups into the labor market and providing affordable goods and services to the poor34. For instance, the American social entrepreneur J.B. Schramm has helped thousands of low-income high-school students to get into tertiary education35. 2.2.5 Fulfilling Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)36 Using a more formal framework for sustainable development, it was mapped all the enterprises in the Schwab Foundation network according to their contribution to the

32 (Remenyi, 2004, p.141) 33 (Alter, 2006, p.4) 34(OECD, 2000, p.49) 35(Bornstein, 2003, p.159) 36 (Sustainable Development: How social entrepreneurs make it happen, Christian Seelos & Johanna Mair, 2005)

28

MDGs. Figure 2.5 shows the results of the impact analysis of the models, products and services of the current population of 74 social enterprises.

Figure 2.5. Number of Schwab Foundation SEs that positively impact the 18 MDG targets, and how many of these are operating in the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) Source? We concluded that 48 initiatives contribute directly to targets defined by the MDGs37. From the information available, the remaining initiatives may not directly affect specific MDGs, yet many of them fulfill other UN goals which were, in fact, also outlined in the Millennium Declaration of 2000, such as human rights issues, landmine clearance and others. Thus, a majority of the Schwab Foundation social entrepreneurs have a direct and positive impact on achieving the MDGs. As Figure 2.5 indicates, these social entrepreneurs have shown that it is possible to operate in some of the least developed countries (LDCs) as defined by the UN, including Afghanistan, Angola, Benin, Chad, Congo, Ethiopia, Gambia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Niger, Tanzania, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos and Nepal. Interestingly, we have no indication that any of the social entrepreneurs actually made a conscious attempt to directly contribute to the MDGs, especially as most of them were founded long before the MDGs were defined. Yet many of the models that social entrepreneurs build through experimentation and trial and error are in line with the targets set by the development community. We therefore suggest that by examining the models of successful social entrepreneurs, we will be able to generate a better understanding of how to address the MDGs and achieve sustainable development than by focusing only on the more traditional development projects undertaken by large multilateral institutions, local governments and non-governmental organizations.

37 (Seelos et al. 2005)

29

Chapter Three Learning for Action

30

Introduction Now, it is time to see if the concepts we have already discussed are applicable or not, we are not showing in this chapter types of entrepreneurs but rather concrete case studies of famous entrepreneurs creating initiatives. What we are presenting here is the efforts in order to foster and create social entrepreneurs, and it is worthy to say again that the "YES Leaders" are social activists. Moreover, the purpose of this toolkit is to help you "YES Leaders" to create social entrepreneurs within your community and this will occur when you understand the concepts, process and successful approaches of creating social entrepreneurs. 3.1 ASHOKA’S THEORY OF CHANGE 38

Ashoka’s job is to make “everyone a change maker.” To help create a world where everyone has the freedom, confidence, and skills to turn challenges into solutions. This allows each person the fullest, richest life. And a society so constituted will evolve and adapt faster and more surely than any other. Each person -rather better than the body’s white blood “attack” cells- courses though society spotting challenges and then conceiving and putting in place the next better step. Ashoka’s own community of change makers has the opportunity to make a very big difference - and therefore responsibility to do our best - in advancing this goal. We have this opportunity for several reasons: (1) Ashoka understands and serves a historical process, the transformation of the citizen half of the world’s operations from a pre -modern to the same entrepreneurial and competitive architecture that has driven business ahead over the last three centuries. Such fundamental structural change is historically extremely rare. (2) Ashoka is an association of a large share of the world’s leading social entrepreneurs. Its values and culture are sharply, deeply, and strictly focused on serving this core membership, its “clients”. No one knows them, their needs, their life cycle, their very distinctive perspectives and ways of thinking, their values, and their dreams as well. Moreover, Ashoka is uniquely positioned to see both the individual pieces and the emerging patterns across the world. (3) Ashoka has been deeply engaged with learning from and learning to serve both this historical process and its leading social entrepreneur constituents across the globe throughout the last quarter century. These years have been the years when the citizen sector, led by its entrepreneurial cutting edge, “tipped” irreversibly onto its new competitive path and entered a period of rapid catch-up productivity acceleration and therefore growth. Ashoka now has a rich pipeline of proven, high leverage interventions ready to spread globally and an institution that spots needs and then builds and adapts quickly.

Ashoka’s core strategy is to find and drive home the highest leverage, most important interventions appropriate to each historical stage that will (1) advance social entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurship and (2) speed the transformation of the citizen sector and, more important, enable it to crystallize in

38 http://www.ashoka.org/

31

the wisest possible way

Ashoka is an entrepreneurial institution serving entrepreneurs. Its opportunities

equire strongly entrepreneurial leadership. It must therefore be an integrated/decentralized institution staffed by collegial/entrepreneurial people.

Ashoka’s first contribution was to create the functional equivalent of the venture programs that help top businesses take off. Helping the world’s leading social entrepreneurs have the freedom and key supports necessary to fly is very probably the world’s most highly leveraged, highest impact investment:

• It launches a big idea that long term probably will change its field on a continental scale.

• It launches the social entrepreneur on a lifetime of high impact, independent change making.

• It helps create the institution needed to support both. • Its intervention comes at the moment when a little means the world. • Each successful social entrepreneur and idea becomes a highly

contagious (because enormously empowering) role model that encourages hundred of others to care and to take the social initiative.

• Such social entrepreneurs are the cutting edge of the democratic revolution -- citizens exercising power in society by organizing ideas and others.

• Leading social entrepreneurs launch key pattern changes that ripple across applications and geography (every bit as much as major scientific break-through) -- opening opportunities for myriad local change makers. The growth of social entrepreneurship spurs the growth of the broader citizen sector, which in turn helps today’s entrepreneurs and helps create more tomorrow.

Over its first decade Ashoka often said: “There is nothing more powerful than a big pattern changing idea if it is in the hands of a first class entrepreneur.”

Then Ashoka learned there is something that is more powerful -- a community of leading social entrepreneurs working together.

As the field has evolved, the Ashoka team has developed new programs fitted to the needs of each phase. Each possible program must meet two tests before Ashoka will commit to it:

• Will it make a major difference to the development of social entrepreneurship and of the competitive citizen sector globally?

• Can Ashoka make it happen? Do we clearly see the “jujitsu” leverage points that will allow us to replace today’s seemingly granite wall of current practice with a vigorously self-multiplying new pattern?

Ashoka encourages (e.g., through its Global Collaborations challenge) Fellows, staff, and others in its community to propose and begin to test possible programs. Many of today’s key programs started this way. However, as the ideas progress, Ashoka applies these two tests ever more tightly.

32

The following table provides sketches of several phases in the evolution of our field (our “market”) and provides examples of Ashoka responses:

Historical Stage Examples of Ashoka Response I) Early 1980s: Outside the U.S. there are very few independent, modern citizen groups. Less than 5,000 in Brazil, ten in Slovakia

Conceived almost two decades earlier, Ashoka is founded and coins “social entrepreneur

However, a wave of social entrepreneurs is beginning to emerge as democracy breaks through in Latin America and the post-independence generation comes of professional age in Asia.

Ashoka sets out to design, test, and refine a venture support program for the world’s leading social entrepreneurs, their ideas, and the institutions needed to support both. It spends five years at intentionally tiny scale trial and error (numerous) learning how to build a system that reliably will find and then with maximum leverage help launch the world’s best social ideas and entrepreneurs. By late 1986, it has 85 percent of today’s proven venture methodology (see “Selecting Leading Social Entrepreneurs”) and decides to spread this methodology globally as rapidly as possible. From 1987 to 1991 Ashoka grows from $326,000 to $2.2 million and from electing 15 to 100 Fellows a year. Fellowship services increase markedly at local and global levels. Ashoka is serving 75 percent of the population living in countries that tolerate social entrepreneurship. Fellow impacts are consistently very high. Others begin to re cognize the profession

II) Early and Middle 1990s The number of citizen groups grows rapidly. From one environmental group in Indonesia in 1982, Ashoka could count over 2000 in 1997. Brazil has roughly 1 million citizen groups in 2000. The number of sophisticated, large groups grows rapidly as the best start ups of the prior ten to fifteen years mature. This newly competitive citizen sector achieves rapidly growing power at the national as well as local level. It also begins to exercise global power. It becomes increasingly connected/ competitive. These patterns apply equally within the Ashoka community as to the field as a whole

Ashoka, following the maturing profile of its Fellows, learns how to provide high impact services needed later in the life cycle. One example is the package of Strategic Partnership services, focused on areas where the field is weak and where the fellowship’s usual mutual help approach is of limited utility. For example, Hill and Knowlton agrees to help Fellows and Ashoka programs with marketing and communications globally. • As both the number of leading social entrepreneurs multiplies and they increasingly are at advanced stages in the entrepreneur’s life cycle, many and extremely powerful new collaborative opportunities o pen. Ashoka responds to the resulting “client” demand and historic opportunity by catalyzing and institutionalizing new patterns for the

33

profession and field. One key example: the “mosaic" initiatives. Over the 1990s Ashoka learns how to enable the entrepreneurs addressing the same challenge, e.g. the needs of young people or of the environment, to entrepreneur as a group: (1) to extract from their work across the globe universally empowering principles that allow anyone working the issue to see major new avenues; (2) to market these principles within the fellowship -- allowing each entrepreneur to add new strategic avenues, approaches, and possible clients to their current model;and (3) to collaborate in marketing the principles to the millions working the issues. In several cases Ashoka already has defined the key principles; it has launched demonstrations, e.g., Youth Venture for the Learning Initiative and the developing work with Cemex and Nueva for Full Economic Citizenship. Teams of Fellows in five countries are also working with focus groups to develop local marketing approaches for the Learning Initiative. Several mosaic initiatives should reach scale lift off in two years

Ashoka ’s interventions take place on three different but interconnecting planes:

(1) It launches and provides full life cycle support for individual top tier social

innovations, entrepreneurs, and their institutions: stipends, community, and inputs such as the strategic partnerships.

(2) It is building patterns, frameworks, supports, and institutions that allow the members of the community to have impacts far greater together than they could apart. A few examples: (1) the mosaic initiatives and (2)collaborations across the profession to address its greatest common strategic needs e.g., encouraging many more people to enter the field.

(3) It is helping to build key elements of the field’s long term architecture -- e.g. the creation of new financial service institutions to serve the sector..

Often one intervention will prove important on several levels. The mosaic initiatives, for example, greatly enrich individual Fellows who can complement the principles and approaches they developed with those created by the rest of the field. By working together to articulate and then market these principles, they can affect the lives of far more young people far more deeply than they could working alone. By thus helping one another and then collaborating to market their joint product, moreover, the intensity and value of the fellowship or community will grow sharply. After several such powerful success experiences, the field will know both the great value of and how to organize such mosaic initiatives wherever a new issue comes into focus long into the future. The field will have gained the capacity to engage in

34

group entrepreneurship, probably the most important shared capacity this field can have. In the 1980s, Ashoka developed and five years later went to global scale with its first product, launching and helping leading social entrepreneurs and their ideas succeed. This remains a cornerstone contribution, and we believe it always will be because the need for social entrepreneurship will only increase with time. In the 1990s, Ashoka’s market matured rapidly creating multiple and strongly interdependent new needs. The membership, individually and collectively, we exist to serve then insistently drew us in to deal with these new needs and opportunities. We have now developed; by and large tested and refined; and are ready and, given the market, must now move quickly to implement these new programs. We are now entering our second period of rapid growth. This second cycle is significantly different from the first. It involves more elements. Much of the power comes from the synergy among these. Many elements focus more on systemic change than direct service to individual entrepreneurs. This cycle is more complex and variable. Because the field is moving faster at this more mature stage, we have less time. This next stage in the field’s evolution requires new institutions. Much of Ashoka’s work product in this new cycle is new processes and institutions. Success also requires Ashoka to evolve significantly. A few examples: • Each program (e.g., every mosaic initiative, stimulating a new social financial

services sector, or the field’s Academy) must have a dedicated powerful global entrepreneur to succeed. Ashoka therefore must look increasingly like a flat professional firm with a growing number of “partner” intrapreneurs, supported by high quality “junior partners” and “associates”.

• Leadership must come very significantly from Ashoka’s leading social (and

business) entrepreneur core membership. These members and Ashoka staff should be largely interchangeable, both in terms of initiating and running p rojects and, as much as possible, in terms of careers. Another reason staff must be “collegial entrepreneurs.”

• All these entrepreneur-led global programs must be melded with one another and

with the increasingly rich body of institutions the citizen sector is developing regionally. Ashoka’s new cross-cutting practice groups will help with the first part of this challenge.

Far more important are Ashoka’s four main “strategic diamond” teams. They are comprised of Ashoka’s front line staff and other active members of its community in the four regions with 85 percent of the world’s citizen sector activity. While Ashoka will provide appropriate lesser levels of service elsewhere, it will focus its implementation and integration efforts in these four areas. Each of these four teams (and their leaders) have three performance goals/ventures for the next five years: (1) contributing importantly to building a strong and wisely designed citizen sector; (2) maximizing service to Ashoka’s core entrepreneur membership; and (3) building a brilliant team. To succeed they must mesh all the program ingredients

available into a carefully phased, maximally mutually reinforcing action program.

35

Getting the relationship right between these diamond teams and the global cross-cutting program entrepreneurs is critical.

Not every entrepreneurial initiative will fully succeed. There are too many variables, ranging from entrepreneurial skill to the occasional perfect storm. However, Ashoka’s overall program, even if it seems ambitious, is very, very likely to succeed. In addition to the factors listed on page one, Ashoka’s design is robust: • Entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs intervene at any decision point headed in the

wrong direction. They are also the ultimate realists and change their ideas whenever needed to succeed.

• Parallel programs and redundancy provide further strong insurance. Ashoka has, for example, a dozen programs designed in whole or part to shift the citizen sector onto a path of re -engagement with business. If e ight or ten pass the jujitsu point of take off, we will probably achieve our purpose. We plan for only one third of the promising mosaic initiative programs that win small early stage investments to make it to the expensive marketing stage. And, even if several that do enter the marketing phase only have modest impact, the others that do fully succeed will be sufficient to provide the energy needed to give our field the capacity for group entrepreneurship. Another example: Changemakers and the mosaic initiatives are both designed independently to tease out and develop the universally empowering principles embedded in the entrepreneurs’ practice. If both work, they feed one another. If one fails in one area or even overall, the work still goes ahead.

To succeed, Ashoka must be a special community. One that understands its rapidly evolving market. One that is entirely open to its members/clients and their ideas. One that is as rigorous and tough-minded as it is open and creative. One that is as entrepreneurial as its members/clients are entrepreneurial. One that is therefore constantly experimenting and learning and improving. One whose entrepreneurs see and care as much about the whole as they do about their piece -- and who will, therefore, weave the pieces together to great mutual and overall benefit. One where the internal spirit mirrors the quality of the global community it serves and is helping to build. Ashoka the organization must provide the value-based home, the framework and supports and disciplin e necessary for such a community to grow and flourish. Doing so is our biggest challenge.

3.2 Making of the Social Entrepreneurs: Story of a B-school Elective Course 39 BY: Madhukar Shukla & XLRI Jamshedpur Many years back, the late Nobel Laureate Milto n Freidman had made his famous statement: “The business of business is business” – that is, the primary purpose of business is to make profits for the shareholder and to serve its customers. According to him, and many others, any other “social responsibility” by business is not only a deviation from its basic agenda, but would also go against the interests of its primary stakeholders.

39Electronic copy of this paper is available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=983207

36

Times have changed since then, and there are a number of reasons to have a re -look at this definition of the purpose of business, and the role of management professionals in society. One reason, of course, is that in an increasingly complex and interconnected world, business organizations are no longer stand-alone entities; they are also a part of the larger society, and get impacted by it. A few months back, in an interview at Wharton University, KV Kamath, the CEO of ICICI Bank, was asked about what unforeseen factor could adversely impact the business in the coming years. His response was, “...in the Indian context, I would say something that is unforeseen, like social strife, because we are living in a world of haves and have -nots. And there is a divide… To me, this is the single most important thing which could impact business.“ A more important reason to think of “business beyond business”, however, is that, besides their economic role, businesses are also social institutions – and have an institutional role of contributing to the society. This need for a deeper, more proactive and responsible interface with the socie ty is even greater in a country like India, where barely 6-7% of the economically active work-force is in the “organized sector”. In contrast, a huge manpower works in the “informal sector”, which is inadequately skilled, lacks access to resources and is not adequately productive (even though it accounts for 60% of India’s GDP, 68% of income, 30% of agricultural exports, and 40% of manufacturing exports). In fact, according to Vision 2020 prepared by the Planning Commission: "‘The public organized sector has been and will continue to shed jobs. Although the private organized sector will contribute significantly to the growth of the economy, its contribution to the overall employment generation will be quite modest, since total employment in this sector currently represents only 2.5 per cent of all jobs. Even if this sector grows by 30 per cent per annum, over five years it will contribute less than one per cent to the growth of the workforce.’ ... an in-depth examination of employment potentials makes it evi dent that the largest share of new jobs will come from the unorganized sector.” Thus, a sustainable and equitable socio-economic growth can be possible only if the managerial talent moves beyond the corporate boundaries and gets involved in adding value to the “unorganized sector” - by creating and improving livelihoods, and by helping it become more productive. And lastly, being “socially relevant” is an essential part of being a “professional”. The doctors or lawyers, for instance, remain their professional selves, even when they are out of their chambers. The reason is that, not only they possess a specialized set of knowledge/skills, but also that these skills remain socially relevant even outside their workplace. By the same logic, a manager/B-school graduates can really be a called "professionals" only when they can create social/economic value on a sustainable basis outside their corporate roles, e.g. when, - The HR Manager can use his skills to empower the de-empowered in the society - The Sales Manager can use his skills to open up a market for the village artisans - The Corporate Strategist can turnaround a school or a hospital - The Finance Expert can find a solution to the 'cash -flow' problem of a vegetable vendor ...etc.

37

It is against this backdrop, this year, a new elective course on Social Entrepreneurship was offered to the final year students at XLRI Jamshedpur. The following is the narration of the course, its design, roll-out and learning for developing social entrepreneurship among management professionals. 3.2.1 Background XLRI Jamshedpur is a premier business school which was founded by the Jesuits in 1949. Since then, besides providing the regular business education, it has strived to inculcate social sensitivity among its students. For instance, as a part of their induction, students spend 3 nights in remote villages in small teams, interact with the people, and come back with plans for managerial interventions to help those areas; the institute encourages students’ societies such as Social Initiative Group for Managerial Assistance (SIGMA) to take up projects to the marginalized sections of the society; it has also adapted two villages in Jharkhand, and students are encouraged to take up pilot projects for their economic upliftment. As a continuation of this effort, in this academic year, it is introduced a new elective on “Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship” for the second year students. The need for such a course was felt because often some students would like to consider the social sector as a career option, but would also feel ill-equipped to make the choice. Also, many often viewed social entrepreneurship as a “by charity/ for charity” venture, and not as a financially sustainable entrepreneurial activity. The aim of th e course is to provide to the students with a more structured exposure to enable them to consider this field as a viable career option, or as the course announcement mentioned: “The purpose of this course is not to make people aware about social entrepreneurship; if out the class of 30, even 3 people decide to take this forward and join this sector, the purpose will be served... that is, to become a social entrepreneur.” The response to the course was more than anticipated. For a class size of 30, almost 60 students subscribed. The final selection of 33 participants was made on the basis of their write-up on “where does social entrepreneurship fit into the scheme of things in your life?” Their responses were also an insight into the talent, energy and idealism that focused on “making a difference”, but which normally gets completely ignored in the conventional b -school curriculum. A few excerpts from their write-ups: ? Having had many domestic helps over the years - and seeing the torture they have to put up with - got me thinking that what is it I can do in my capacity to help them? One does not even have to go to a village to see the real India; it's very much there in the city slums… ? I have lived in Kharagpur, IIT campus… A temple of learning, surrounded by some of the most uneducated people of rural Bengal; an Institute flush with funds, surrounded by some of the most poverty-stricken people; a place enjoying uninterrupted power supply, surrounded villages with no electricity …one day, I would like to return there with some idea on how to make a difference… ? Individual’s success does not come in isolation. Society plays major role in helping the individual to reach where he wants to. As an obvious consequence, I would measure my success not only in terms of materialistic possessions but also in terms

38

of what I can contribute back to society. As… B-school students, we should try to make a difference rather than think ing only in terms of bottom lines. ? The first and foremost reason is my unwillingness to settle abroad. Now, how is that related? I feel I should stay in India and give back to the society my bit. I realize that not just rural India but also parts of urban populace, which are unorganized and need a lot of managerial support… I think a lot can be and needs to be done to the Indian population…we, as responsible citizens, should come forward. ? The village trip that we had in the first year where we had no electricity, no school in a radius of 6 kms and my own musings over the necessity of entrepreneurs to invest more in villages and towns has made me a more convinced person… a career by itself makes little sense unless a person strongly relates oneself to his or her own society meaningfully. 3.2.2 The Roll-Out The design of the course was aimed to provide as far as possible, within the time constraint, a realistic, hands-on and experiential understanding of the SE field. Four pedagogies were used to facilitate learning: 3.2.3 Moderated Discussions: The purpose of these was to sensitize the participants to various social issues and the meaning of social entrepreneurship. These were often facilitated through small exercises. For instance, in one session, unknown to them, each half of the class was given two very different, but factual, descriptions of the Indian society/economy. One described India in terms of its growing GDP, exports, its prowess in IT and space technologies, its large technically qualified manpower, increasing FDI, etc., while the other described the country in terms of proportion of people living below poverty line, agricultural indebtness and farmer suicides, malnutrition, lack of basic health, education or sanitation facilities, etc. When both groups were asked to discuss where the country was heading to, based on the data they were given, it surfaced the issues of the wide socio-economic divide in the country. Some discussions were stimulated by showing the video clips of Ashoka Fellows and other social entrepreneurs. One such discussion helped the participants appreciate the similarities and difference between the business and social entrepreneurs:

• ?Like any business entrepreneur, social entrepreneurs also find gaps and create a venture to serve the unserved 'markets'

• The primary difference between the business and the social entrepreneurs, however, is the "purpose" for setting up the venture. While the business entrepreneurs' efforts focus on building a business and earning profits, the SE’s purpose is to create social change.

• While a business entrepreneur may also create changes in the society, but that is not the primary purpose of starting the venture. Similarly, a social entrepreneur may generate profits, but for him/her that is not the primary reason for starting the venture. Profitability - not 'profit-making' - however, is important for the SEs. Being 'profitable' helps self-sustainability of the venture, and also works as a mechanism for self-monitoring.

• Another key difference between the social and the business entrepreneur is in

the meaning of "wealth" creation. For the business entrepreneur, 'wealth' is

39

same as profits. For the social entrepreneur, however, wealth also encompasses creation/sustenance of the social and environmental capital. Therefore, to be viable, a social entrepreneurship venture must show a positive Social and/or Environmental Role.

3.2.4 Case Studies of Social Entrepreneurship Ventures To develop an inductive appreciation of social entrepreneurship, as well as to stimulate thinking in direction of becoming a social entrepreneur, the course also required the participants to work in small groups, and develop and present cases of six real-life social enterprise (The six enterprises selected for the purpose were: Aravind Eye Healthcare, Basix Bank, Ekal Vidyalaya, Grameen Bank, Sri Grameen Mahila Udyog (Lijjat), Narayan Hrudayalaya, and SEWA). In addition, during the course, they also had the opportunity of interacting with some local social entrepreneurs. These exposures helped them to gain an understanding into four critical aspects of social entrepreneurship: • Opportunity Identification & Innovation: Social entrepreneurs are innovators

who create change. What innovative insight did the entrepreneur bring to identify an opportunity to create change? How did s/he create and spread this innovation and change?

• Value Creation & Impact: What new value was created by the enterprise/

entrepreneur, and how? What can be the conceptual tools to measure/assess the impact and effectiveness of the social enterp rise?

• Sustainability: How did the social entrepreneur make the venture sustainable –

financially, organizationally, and in terms of continuity of the venture? • Leadership & Personal Qualities: What were the characteristics of social

entrepreneurs’ leadership? What personal qualities (background, skills, values, beliefs, etc.) helped the entrepreneur to succeed in creating value?

The participants found this intervention quite useful, since it exposed them to the nuances of starting and running a sustainable social enterprise. It also helped to note the similarities across diverse social ventures and entrepreneurs in different fields, and derive their own understanding of the field. More importantly, by getting exposed to how each of these social enterprises had evolved over a period of time, it helped them to appreciate that, as one of them wrote in feedback for the course, “how big ideas actually start as small ventures.” 3.2.5 Developing a Project Proposal for a Social Enterprise The third learning element of the course was the requirement to develop a “business plan” for a social venture project. Based on their insights from the course, the participants’ groups were required to identify one opportunity for social value creation, and develop a project proposal for building a sustainable social enterprise. The “theoretical” underpinning of these projects was an insightful observation that was made by Prof Mohammad Yunus of Grameen Bank: "You take the best seed of the tallest tree from the most fertile forest, and plant it in a small flower-pot. The seed does not grow into the tall tree... not because the seed was bad, but because it got planted in the wrong place.” Likewise, people and groups in the society remain marginalized because the social system does not allow them access to “nutrients”, i.e. access to resources, information, markets, credit, social equity, etc.

40

The project proposals were to follow this simple wisdom: For the seed to grow into a healthy tree, the “ground”, where it is planted, needs to be changed. Similarly, for people and groups to realize their potential, the social entrepreneurial venture must change the “ground”, i.e., aim to change the social dynamics that denies them access to their “nutrients”. For developing these project proposals, the groups were formed on the basis of their common interest and the sectors they were enthused about. The topics ranged from ‘providing micro-finance to rural Jhakhand’, ‘providing market access to rural producer’ etc. to ‘providing low-cost educa tion to slum children’, or ‘rehabilitating the platform kids’ etc. As potential social entrepreneurs, these groups were asked to do two things to develop their project proposals. Firstly, they were required to develop their “theory of change”, i.e., to study and articulate their understanding of the “vicious cycle of the ‘system’” which keeps people and groups excluded from resources and opportunities – and what interventions are required to break out of this cycle (Figures 1 & 2 exhibit an example of the process). This also implied that besides the secondary sources, they had to directly interact with the beneficiaries of their ventures to develop their understanding of the problem and possible solutions.

Figure 3.1, Example of Vicious of the "System", Social science research network http://hq.ssrn.com

41

Secondly, they were required to develop a plan which covered the entire “social impact value chain” (see Figure 3), i.e., the project proposal should encompass ? ?the “inputs” (what resources, organizational arrangements, partnerships, etc.) that will go into the venture ? ?the “primary activities” of the venture (what would the social venture will do to convert the “inputs” into desired outputs, and how) ? ?the “measurable outputs” – or the social indicators - of the venture’s activities, and ? ?the monitoring mechanisms that ensure that the “measurable outputs” are aligned to the desired goals of social change.

Figure 3.2 : social Impact Value Chain , Social Science research network http://hq.ssrn.com/. For the participants, this part of the course was one the most engaging, exciting and value-adding activity. It provided them with an opportunity to develop their ideas and vision into concrete form. Moreover, it “fo rced” them to get to know and understand the beneficiaries of their efforts from a first-hand experience. The presentation of project proposal was done as an “open house”. They also invited three social entrepreneurs to give comments and suggestions on the proposals. A few of the participants have continued working on their projects even after the course is over. 3.2.6 SWOT of Oneself as a “Social Entrepreneur” Self-assessment and developing a realistic action plan for oneself is a key prerequisite of becoming a social entrepreneur. The last component of the course addressed this aspect. At the end of the course, the participants were asked to write a “personal learning paper” summarizing their understanding of the qualities needed by a social entrepreneur, and how they would assess themselves on those qualities. Based on the cases and other readings they had done during the course, they were required to identify the KSAs (knowledge, skills and attitudes/motivations) needed to be a social entrepreneur. They were also asked to do their own SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) as a potential social entrepreneur. This helped them to identify the gaps in their own development and to build action plans to fill those up. 3.2.7 Learning from the Course

42

The course offered numerous learning, not only for the participants, but also for us. Some of the significant ones were: ? ?A significant number of b-school students possess the social sensitivity and enthusiasm which normally remains untapped in the typical curriculum and course structure. By offering relevant exposure, they can be nurtured into more socially responsible professionals. ? ?Even if they don’t opt to become social entrepreneurs, the b-school students can make a meaningful contribution to the sector in small, but significant, ways. For instance, often the village producers lack knowledge about market, or SHGs need simple book-keeping skills to make them viable, etc. Even an average b-school student possesses these skills/knowledge to make a difference. ? ?There is a dearth of a body of knowledge about this sector in the business schools. For instance, there were few well-documented case-studies that could be used to derive lessons from. Similarly, it was only as the projects developed that one kept discovering new sources of funding, or government schemes that could support the project, or information about similar projects which one could partner with. ? ?We also discovered that the conventional management theory does not offer solutions to many of the issues that are unique to SE field. For instance, while there is much literature on ‘competitive strategy’ in traditional management field, the social entrepreneurship relies heavily on building collaborative partnerships with a variety of stakeholders. There is no framework which can guide a budding social entrepreneur about how to build such partnerships. ? ?In the absence of the above, we found that the best source of learning about SE is through cases/ stories of social ventures and through live interactions with social entrepreneurs. 3.3 The Blueprint Project 40 3.3.1 Overview The International Young Professionals Foundation (IYPF) and Youth 2 Youth worked together to run a national series of workshops with the intention to:

(i) Recognize and promote enterprising young people in Australian communities;

(ii) Develop, catalyze and enhance enterprise skills and support networks amongst Australian young people to assist them in turning ideas in to actions

(iii) Produce case studies of successful young Australian social, environmental and business entrepreneurs

The Blueprint Project had two major components – the workshops and the case studies. The Workshops

40 http://projects.takingitglobal.org/blueprint

43

Each workshop featured stories from successful young social, environmental or business entrepreneurs. The stories focused on why they started their enterprise and how they went about it – the transferable elements of their experience that the participants of the workshops could relate to. As well as the opportunity to meet and hear from these young entrepreneurs, there was a skill development session presenting different tools and approaches for turning “ideas to action” and giving them a “test run” on ideas from within the group. The workshops ended with an action planning session for follow up to the workshops. Opportunities for linking to local initiatives in the youth enterprise field were presented where available (e.g. Youth 2 Youth) and the option of creating a local network to have ongoing meetings and for young people to support and learn as they seek to implement ideas were explored. Between 20 and 30 young people participated in each of the workshops held in Brisbane, Adelaide and Sydney. The Case Studies The stories of each of the successful young entrepreneurs who presented in the workshops formed case study material. These stories were captured digitally at each of the workshops, and elements were drawn from them to create a hard copy and electronic publication, as well as the creation of a CD-ROM. Both the publication and the CD-ROM have been available publicly to young people interested in enterprise and interested organizations all over Australia. The case study material became part of the Youth for the Future Commonwealth initiative and has ben made available and showcased at the Youth for the Future conference later in 2003 (http://www.thesource.gov.au/creating_common_wealth/). It was also available and promoted through the Youth Employment Summit Global Knowledge Resource .41 3.3.2 Implementation The Blueprint Project, was launched originally as part of the Australian celebration of Global Youth Service Day (http://www.gysd.net) and National Youth Week (http://www.youthweek.com), and it was designed to be a national program with both local and national outcomes. The project itself provided a national platform for connecting enterprising young Australians and promoting their achievements. By running the workshops through local host organizations and local facilitators, however, Blueprint also sought to mobilize local knowledge and talent to not only provide a better outcome and local context for the participants of the workshops, but also enhance the capacity for the workshop to catalyze further local activity in the area of developing and supporting enterprising young Australians. Project Managers To deliver the intended outcomes of the Blueprint project, the International Young Professionals Foundation contracted two talented project managers to coordinate the two aspects of the national project: Workshop Project Manager: Tamara Price Case Study Project Manager: Karen Miles

41 http://www.yesweb.org/gkr/index.html

44

Workshop Details Three Blueprint workshops were held around Australia in the time being covered by this report42. BrisbaneA

Figure: 2.3 Blueprint project, workshop table Workshop Program The structure, content and materials for the Blueprint workshops were developed by Youth 2 Youth based on their significant expertise in the youth enterprise development area. A detailed program outline was prepared for facilitators, and all support materials needed, including ice -breaker games and resource and idea analysis tools, were provided to facilitators. All facilitators were encoura ged to remain close to the program as outlined, though were encouraged to use discretion and flexibility in applying the program, with factors such as time and audience playing a role. The Sydney workshop, for instance, extended the workshop to four hours, instead of the initial three, based on feedback from the Brisbane workshop that there was insufficient time. The Adelaide workshop introduced an activity whereby participants were given extracted passages from notable texts on enterprise and asked in gro ups to discuss and evaluate the ideas given in their section and then share with the larger gathering. Facilitators At each workshop, two facilitators were sourced from the local community to provide the on the- ground running of the workshop. In Brisbane and Adelaide, facilitators were drawn from the local host organizations. All were provided with copies of all the materials prior to the workshop, and participated in a group training session via teleconference with Jessica Keily from Youth 2 Youth. This training session was held in early April. Host Organizations In each location, a host organization was sought and appointed to be the main point of contact for local participants. Each host had the responsibility of sourcing a venue and catering, contributing to the search for speakers, and working with the facilitators

42 Blue print report- June 2003

45

to ensure physical materials (such as pens, paper etc) were provided on the day, as well as providing feedback and returning the digital tapes to the project managers at the conclusion of the session. Promotion Promotion for the workshops was primarily e-mail based, utilizing existing national networks such as YouthGas, the International Young Professionals Foundation, YES-Australia, and the Golden Key International Honour Society. Once details for each workshop were confirmed, emails were targeted to potential interested groups in the local area, utilizing the knowledge and contacts of the facilitators and host organizations. Case Studies Over the three locations, seven speakers were involved, and had their stories recorded for the print and CD-ROM publications. In addition, Cameron Neil, Jessica Keily and Karen Miles submitted their own stories and views of enterprise development to round the case studies out to 10. The hardcopy publication was created and printed by Speak Out (http://www.speakout.com.au), an innovative Brisbane-based not-for-profit social enterprise that engages young people experiencing disadvantage to create quality visual design services. The CD-ROM interface and case study video was produced by Artec Digital (http://www.artecdigital.com.au/). The CD covers were also designed and printed by Speak Out. The print and CD-Rom publications will be made available to the public via the websites of the International Young Professionals Foundation (http://www.iyps.org/blueprint) and Youth 2 Youth (http://www.youth2youth.com.au). Hard copies of both publications are añsp available on order from the IYPF Funding and the Implementation of Blueprint The Blueprint project was initiated because of investment from the Foundation for Young Australians in to the YES Austra lia Network. With funds available, members of this YES network, with significant input from the Network’s host institution, the International Young Professionals Foundation, identified an opportunity to run a series of workshops to promote enterprising young Australians and create case studies of some of existing young Australian entrepreneurs. Such a project help to draw on the strengths and interests of the Network members, contribute to the Network’s objectives, and help to expand the opportunities available to young people in Australia. With the Foundation for Young Australians money in hand to seed the initiative, the IYPF wrote proposals for funding for a series of 14 workshops around Australia that would produce 28 case studies. Proposals were also written to facilitate the creation of the case study publications. As the proposals were being considered, the IYPF and Youth 2 Youth started work on the project, implementing the first workshop as part of Global Youth Service Day (GYSD) and National Youth Week celebrations. The IYPF identified that the FYA funds would cover the implementation of three workshops and that, without further funding, this would be the extent of the project in its current form. It became clear to IYPF in May, about the same time as the second and third workshops were being convened in Sydney and Adelaide, that while funding would

46

“An excellent, well organized, well run

workshop with some very inspiring speakers.

I’m astounded by the ideas people have.”

As a result of the numerous comments of participants indicating they would like to stay in touch with those they met, and the speakers, a on-line community was created in TakingITGlobal and linked to the http://www.iyps.org/blueprint website to facilitate this continued interaction.

be available to create the case study publications, resources to convene more workshops was not going to be forthcoming at this point. IYPF and Youth 2 Youth made the decision to complete the three workshops and produce the case study publications. This would complete a first cycle of the initiative. Currently, IYPF and Youth 2 Youth are exploring options for implementing a second cycle of the project. The case study publication production was funded by the National Innovation Awareness Strategy of the Commonwealth Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources. The Foundation for Young Australians money was used to fund the workshops. 3.3.3 Feedback The following feedback is a summary of the responses from the three workshops, drawn from feedback sought from participants, speakers and the observations of the facilitators. How participants heard about the workshop

1. Email – most of the attendees had received an email on the matter, generally from networks such as YouthGas

2. Word of mouth 3. Other – websites and paper flyers

The Workshop Responses clearly indicated that the vast majority of attendees enjoyed the program and were inspired. It was felt that a vital part of the workshops’ success was the opportunity for participants to meet other young enterprising people who they will keep in touch with. There were a h andful of participants who enjoyed it but felt that it could have been better and they could have learnt more. The Speakers The speakers were well chosen and interacted well with the workshop and the participants. Across all locations, the speaker sessions were consistently noted as a highlight of the experience. Many of the participants indicated they would appreciate an opportunity for follow up contact with the speaker, while others noted they were inspired by their stories and were able to relate their own experiences. Where do we go from here? Most of the participants indicated their desire to become involved in an enterprise – be it starting their own, or becoming involved in one of the organizations highlighted at each session. At each location the participants noted they would be interested in a follow-up activity that would allow them to further develop their ideas and meet up with those they met at this first event. 3.3.4 Recommendations The interest in the Blueprint workshops was incredible, and from a diverse and geographically disparate range of people and organizations. While the funding that enabled the first three workshops to be convened has been spent, the International Young Professionals

47

Foundation and Youth 2 Youth are investigating the opportunities for continuing the project in other locations. Suggestions to better the program – from facilitators, participants, hosts and project managers – have included:

o Extending the workshop to a minimum of four hours. o Reviewing the workshop structure to facilitate easier and more logical flow

between the activities and ensure its completion within the timeframe. o More comprehensive materials for participants, including an agenda of

activities for the day, and further information to take home, and ma king these materials available upon request to those who are not able to attend a workshop.

o More lead-time before each workshop for better local promotion. o Ensuring the speakers in each location are from different industries o Dong more to facilitate coordinated follow-up in each location.

More general recommendations and observations included: ?? The format of the workshops, especially linking aspiring enterprising young Australians with other young entrepreneurs in their community, is an interesting and useful approach to fostering entrepreneurship, innovation and economic development in commu nities. Collective approaches to entrepreneurship development, i.e. through creating local communities and convening workshops like Blueprint, seem to have significant value to young people, especially those in the early stages of developing an idea. Enterprise based approaches are not mainstream in the community and young people with preferences in these areas can benefit from connecting with others with similar interests. ?? The marketing of the Blueprint project was careful to emphasize “ideas to action” and “enterprising young Australians” over “entrepreneur” and “entrepreneurship”. The “entrepreneur” word seems to have a more niche appeal and is still very much in the business space. It was, in part, the intention of Blueprint to expand entrepreneur definitions to include all those people working to turn ideas in to action. ?? The Blueprint workshops need to convened and tested outside major urban cities? Areas?- YES Latin America has tailored the Blueprint project to the regional reality and launched as a joint venture with the IYPF in the First Latin American Encounter on Youth Employment organized in September 2005 in Asuncion, Paraguay. In 2006, proposals for funding the project has been presented to donors as well as the logo contest for the latin American version was completed and then the corporate image of the project is already done. 3..3.5 The Bid Network43

The BiD Network Foundation runs the BiD Challenge and this website www.bidnetwork.org.

Our mission is to contribute to sustainable economic development by stimulating entrepreneurship in developing countries.

We try to achieve this by:

43 www.bidnetwork.org.

48

1. Stimulating small and medium sized entrepreneurship to create jobs and raise income in developing countries.

2. Engaging professionals , investors and organizations offering them the opportunity to directly contribute to poverty reduction through SME development in developing countries.

3. Inspiring people that business and poverty reduction can go hand-in hand.

What moves us:

The Private sector is the backbone of any economy. This is of key importance for economic development and poverty reduction in developing countries. To stimulate economic development we aim to tackle two problems:

The ‘deal- flow’ problem: over large geographical distances it is hard to find, identify and verify good business propositions in developing countries. Quality business plans and their entrepreneurs need to be made visible and accessible.

The ‘missing middle’ problem: There is a financing gap between $5.000 and $500.000 (where microfinance stops and commercial finance starts) for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in developing countries.

Our mission is to tackle these two problems. We have created the BiD Network and the BiD Challenge to support SMEs in developing countries.

Ambitions of the BiD Network Foundation

1. Establish several decentralised national BiD Challenges in developing countries

2. Bring more entrepreneurs into the BiD Network (start-up and established businesses)

3. Engage hundreds of professionals from companies and NGOs as business coaches

4. Move from a ‘prizes-only format’ to one providing loans and investments 5. Develop an online investor-to-entrepreneur lending facility

Activities since 2004

We organised 2 successful international business plan competitions (the BiD Challenge44) and created this on-line community (www.bidnetwork.org), which now has 3700 active members. We received over 2000 business plans and engaged over 300 professionals from corporations and NGO’s to screen and coach plans. In the first year alone we assisted the start-up of almost 20 companies in developing countries that help reduce poverty and employ over 500 people. We expect around 30 start-ups over the 2006 Challenge.

Over 1.5 million people are reached annually with the message that poverty reduction through business can work!

The BiD Network and the BiD Challenge are growing into a movement. Since January 2007 they are joined into a new entity, the BiD Network Foundation.

44 http://www.bidnetwork.org/id.php/44007

49

3.5 YES Institute for Youth Social Entrepreneurship 3.5.1 Overview This Year Intensive Program will be having an international focus to engage and inspire young people to become a source for innovative solutions for action in the social sector. Aimed at achieving the Millennium Development Goals for sustainable poverty alleviation, it will be a cooperative program targeting young people between the ages of 14 – 30 years. This program will work with young people from target communities for a period of one year, where they will learn about community development, leadership skills, and social entrepreneurship. Keeping local empowerment as a priority, the program will consist of a regionalized and trans-global curriculum and structure, intensive classroom sessions, research, dialogue, scholarship awards, and projects based on real world experiences. This multi-faceted one year training will have both a theoretical and project based approach to learning, along with a training component for local trainers. Intensive three week training courses are followed by eleven months of in-country internships with mentoring and final project assessments via a portfolio. These goals will be achieved by providing youth with:

§ Leadership training § Community engagement through advocacy training and activities § Social Entrepreneurship training through in -country project based

learning and mentorship § Links to a global network of social entrepreneurs and resources

Collaboration with Cambridge College, MA and YES will provide the necessary resources to ensure that an effective and sustainable program is achieved, and that the youth employment challenge is tackled. 3.5.2 Our Challenge: Consider this § The world population has reached 6 billion people. One billion are

young people between the ages of 15 - 24 years, out of which 850 million are living in developing countries and the numbers are growing fast.

§ Out of 6 billion people, 1.3 billion live on less than a $1 a day, and 3 billion under $2 a day.

§ One of the greatest challenges facing the world is to generate productive work opportunities for young people in developing countries and to enhance the skill level of youth in developed countries.

With over 80 YES Country Networks 45, the YES Campaign has truly become a global movement. Youth from all over the world are energetic, enthusiastic and passionate about creating effective youth employment initiatives through the YES Networks. However, many still lack the skills and the knowledge to

45 YES Country Networks are youth-led national coalitions that promote youth employment and the spirit of entrepreneurship in their countries. Their primary aim is to work with diverse stakeholders to develop programs and projects to provide youth with opportunities for creating sustainable livelihoods. Membership of YES Networks is diverse, including government officials, development agencies, business groups, and youth-serving civil society organizations.

50

become effective leaders and social entrepreneurs in their developing economies. In addition, many are unable to create robust and sustainable networks to support their ideas due to lack of resources and capacity. Recognizing this need, the YES Campaign is working with youth to fulfill the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by building the leadership and knowledge base of young people; a strategy and mission of the Youth Employment Summit Campaign. YES recognizes the need to promote self-reliance in poor countries by building their human capacity to identify local needs and provide entrepreneurial solutions. As our future (and present) leaders, youth are the best demographic group for this kind of capacity-building. However many past efforts at developing local youth capabilities have been inadequate, due to a beneficiary approach. Through training, mentoring, and the provision of business (economic or social) development services for young people along with the YES Country Networks, this need for capacity-building can be met through the Year In tensive Program. 3.5.3 Goals To build a strong global network of young social entrepreneurs who will lead effective organizations /initiatives and transform youth employment policies and programs. The program goal has seven objectives: Objectives:

1) To apply an understanding of social entrepreneurship and skills of leadership and have the ability to mesh these and apply to specific situations.

2) To instill in youth a clear vision and understanding of personal values, traits, leadership styles, and goals.

3) To cultivate attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that support youth entrepreneurship connected to societal change.

4) To provide youth the knowledge and skills to work with a variety of people in leadership and grass roots levels to effect change.

5) To encourage a commitment and passion to make an impact on their personal communities.

6) To inspire a strong connection to YES and other networks that have similar missions

7) To instill an increased sense of genuine self-confidence, respect for others, and humility with the optimism, generosity and skills needed for social entrepreneurs.

3.5.4 Training Process/Methodology The participating youth will be placed in a Year Intensive Program where they will be taught portable skills through a theoretical and project-based approach to learning. This multi-faceted one year training consists of intensive classroom sessions, research, dialogue, internship, and projects based on real world experiences. This training will be based on an experiential learning methodology that underlies YES and Cambridge College’s training programs worldwide. Experiential learning is hands-on and participant-driven. This approach has proven to be effective in developing new skills, reinforcing existing skills, and developing motivation and self-esteem. Trainees, therefore, will connect the understanding of social entrepreneurship with actual issues being explored by organizations and/or communities.

51

3.5.5 Curriculum Snapshot The training curriculum uses a vision, commitment and transformation model to build the capacity of the trainees. All components will be imparted in a way that moves the trainees past a ‘blame and not possible’ conversation to one of ‘power and self-reliance’. Local Network involvement is an integral component for curriculum, internship development, and program overall. This 12 month project-based internship will include the following activities: 1) 3 weeks of intensive training during Month Two of Program Based on experiential models of learning, it includes in class discussions, individual work, and group activities- which will be reading, writing, reflection, speakers, and individual and group projects that focus on specific social entrepreneurship themes.

• First Week: Leadership o To imbibe a sense of ownership to young citizens

regarding fulfilling their individual destiny and the development of their communities. To show how their energies, creativity and talent can be the driving force in the transformation of their local communities and countries.

• Second Week: Community Building o To show how to work with communities to empower

and improve conditions, expand opportunities and sustain positive change. Resources include individuals, grassroots groups, human service organizations, businesses, governmental agencies and others that impact the community.

o To understand the issues confronting communities and to create collaborative and comprehensive programs with nonprofit organizations and other community entities for community strengthening.

• Third Week: Social Entrepreneurship o To show how to identify community needs and gaps,

discover innovative ways of filling those gaps and connect it to essential life skills, while generating self-employment and entrepreneurship in local communities. Training includes imparting skills on the learning process, and on how to identify and develop business/entrepreneurial opportunities and implementation plans.

2) 11 months of in-country internships

• Month One: Project Development with Mentor o Specific projects are selected along with host sites for

internships by participants and sponsoring organizations with advice and assistance from YES mentors

• Months Three-Twelve: In-country Internship

52

o Youth partake in a rigorous internship program with direct coaching and supervision from YES mentors, peer interaction via regional meetings, internet conferences, and self assessments completed throughout the term of the Internship.

o A final portfolio of work along with certification, a celebration, publication, and dissemination of the program results will ensure sustained participant involvement and future internship replication

3.5.6 Evaluation Plan: Measurement/Sustainability To ensure a cycle of community change, capacity building, and knowledge exchange occurs, seven measures have been built into the Academy for measurement and sustainability of the Year Internship Program.

1. Evaluations: This is both qualitative and quantitative in nature and will be the responsibility of local trainers, mentors, and global YES staff-Project Director and Project Manager. Monthly updates from mentors on progress of youth internships will follow a guideline set out by YES Inc.

2. Host Site Visits : Project Director and Manager will make periodic visits to project sites for further monitoring and evaluation.

3. Surveys: Youth, mentors, and local trainers will be given open and closed ended surveys both before start of program and after to ensure progress. Surveys will be developed by YES global staff. Questions such as the daily proceedings of the internship and other questions about monitoring of youth training, network growth, and program improvement will be asked. Additionally, surveys conducted will include quantifiable questions on number of youth groups, their activities, level of engagements, members and current status.

4. Final Portfolio: Youth will also be held accountable for a final portfolios and journal entries consisting of their project and its progress. Mentors will assist in this process. Project Manager will report all findings to Project Director and a volunteer will enter data into database. Data collected will focus on the goals and objectives of the Year Internship Program.

5. Learning Teams: Youth will be placed into learning teams with other youth who are working on similar projects. Monthly dialogue will occur, allowing for knowledge exchange and network building. Youth will form a strong connection via learning calls to YES and other networks that have similar missions. This will encourage sustainable practices and community development.

6. Certification: YES and Cambridge College leadership certificates will be awarded upon satisfactory completion and documentation of internship projects.

7. Scholarship: Future sustainability methods include awarding youth a total of $2000/2 year scholarship that is contingent upon their progress reports.

53

Chapter Four Public Policy Puzzle

54

Dear YES Leader:, This chapter is your contribution in writing the toolkit, after you have understood the meaning of social entrepreneurship and the conditions needed to create this kind of ventures. Now we ask you to fill this chapter, and share with the YES family the process of writing a new success story. We will collect all the workshop participants' entries to create one common YES recommendation, to teach the world the art of creating social entrepreneurs. All the best Ahmed Youssry Mohammed Yes Family Member

55

1- In regard to the propositions in the second chapter, what are the positive regulations and facilitators in your country that support the entrepreneurship development?

Ex: regulation such as Law, culture orientations, behavior…Etc.

56

2- In regard to the propositions in the second chapter, what are the negative regulations and obstacles in your country that challenges the entrepreneurship development?

57

3- What are the opportunities in your country that you assume are

supporting social entrepreneurs' development? Why? Opportunities such as funding initiatives, international organizations aiming to foster social entrepreneurship... etc.

58

4- What are the threats in your country that you assume they are

challenging social entrepreneurship development? and why?

59

5- What are the strengths of your country YES Network that you assume

are supportive to social entrepreneurs? and why? Strength such as adequate resources, human capital, management structure, etc.

60

6- What are the weaknesses in your country that you assume are

challenging the social entrepreneurship development? Weakness such as shortage of resources, absence of human resources... etc.

61

7- Please, tell us if you were inspired in this YES Alexandria 2007 with any

idea? What are you going to do in order to implement it? Please describe how you are going to implement your understanding of this workshop's content in your country? What are your plans?

62

8- Over here, write yourself a letter that includes a list of the things you

will be committing yourself to do after YES Alexandria 2007.

We will be sending it to you after six months as a reminder to accomplish the commitments you have promised to do after YES Alexandria 2007. Don't forget your address...!

63

9- Did you benefit from this workshop, please tell us the positive and the

negative points? The negative points will allow us to promote ourselves in the future, and the positive points give us the confidence in our methods and work. So please, be fair and judge the work done.

64

Annex 1. Bibliography 2. About YES Inc. 3. About Bib Alex 4. About YES Egypt 5. About SDA 6. About Author

65

1 Bibliography • (Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition, Roger L. Martin & Sally

Osberg, 2007) • (Is social entrepreneurship important for economic development policies ?,

Jürgen Nagler, 2007) • (Gregory Dees et al. 2001, pp. 4–5, cited in Soderborg, 2004). • (OECD, 2000, p.8, OECD, 1998, p.116, Alter, 2006, p.3). • (The Social Dimensions of Entrepreneurship, Amir N. Licht and Jordan I.

Siegel, 2005) • (Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition, Roger L. Martin & Sally

Osberg, 2007) • (Social entrepreneurs" how intentions to create a social enterprise get

formed, Johanna Mair & Ernesto Noboa, 2003) • (The meaning of "social entrepreneurs", J. Gregory Dees, 1998) • HOW INTINTIONS TO CREATE A SOCIAL VENTURE ARE FORMED A

CASE STUDY (Johanna Mair & Ernesto Noboa) June 2005 • (Is social entrepreneurship important for economic development policies ?,

Jürgen Nagler, 2007) • (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development OECD, 1998,) • (Sustainable Development: How social entrepreneurs make it happen,

Christian Seelos & Johanna Mair, 2005

Websites

• http://www.ashoka.org/ • http://www.yesweb.org/gkr/index.html • www.hq.ssrn/ • http://www.business.ualberta.ca/ccse/Publications/ • http://www.manchesterguild.org/indexflash.htm • http://www.skollfoundation.org/skollawards/index.asp • http://www.skollfoundation.org/ • http://del.icio.us/SSE • http://www.socialcatalyst.co.uk/ • http://www.socialedge.org/ • http://www.siconversations.org/ • http://www.xigi.net/ • http://virtueventures.com/setypology/index.php?id=DOC_STRUCTURE&lm=1

66

About YES Inc. Let us be clear. Half-educated, unemployed youth, with no prospect of being integrated into a better future is a prescription for disaster. If young people do not have a stake in the existing social order and political order, if they do not feel there is a way for them, why should they sacrifice today for a better tomorrow? Why should they have an interest in protecting the stability and social safety of that system?

Ismail Serageldin Vice President, World Bank May 1999 On September 11, 2002 under the Co-Chair of Mrs. Mubarak and President Clinton, the Youth Employment Summit (YES) launched a Campaign to create a systemic approach to youth employment generation. YES was launched by over 1,600 delegates from 120 countries, including 45 ministers. Four years of global consultation culminated in five dynamic Summit days that led to the development of a concerted response to the problems faced by unemployed youth. In four ye ars by the end of 2007 the Campaign had organized 3 Global Summits – Egypt, Mexico, Kenya and 2 Regional Forums – India and Paraguay; launched over 80 YES Country Networks, initiated more than 400 projects all over the world, and published more than 100 original publications. YES Inc. serves the following objectives: (1) Build the YES Fund: Global Fund for Youth Entrepreneurship (Clinton Global Initiative) (2) Build Capacity of the YES Leaders: in over 70 countries to develop programs with YES Networks. (3) Organize the 3 remaining YES Summits: Azerbaijan 2008, (To be defined) 2010, Alexandria 2012. (4) Develop Youth Social Entrepreneurship programs: through the Institute for Youth Social Entrepreneurship, a partnership initiative between YES Inc. and Cambridge College.

Our Challenge – consider this : ⇒ World population has reached 6 billion. One billion are young people between the

ages of 15 - 24 years, out of which 850 million are living in developing countries. ⇒ Estimates project that over the next three decades the global labor force between

the ages of 15 - 24 will increase in sheer numbers by another 1.2 billion. Most of this growth will be in developing countries.

⇒ One of the greatest challenges facing the world is to generate productive work opportunities for the young people in developing countries and enhancing the skill level of youth in developed countries.

⇒ Out of 6 billion of us, 1.3 billion live on less than a $1 a day, and 3 billion under $2 a day. Our Design Principles: Three major principles underlie this mission. First, the YES Campaign believes that every person is capable of leading and seeks to provide opportunities for youth to realize their leadership abilities. Next, the Campaign believes in the power of knowledge-sharing and is aware that many effective practices exist. The challenge is to identify these practices and to create opportunities for dissemination, replication, adaptation, and learning. Third , the YES Campaign strives to act as a catalyst that inspires fresh and innovative approaches

67

to human development by connecting critical stakeholders in the private and public sectors. The Campaign focuses on youth, the creative change agents of today, to drive this effort.

(1) Build the YES Fund – A Global Fund for Youth Entrepreneurship. In today’s world with burgeoning populations there are just not enough jobs in the private and public sectors. The YES fund will work to create markets and unleash entrepreneurship in developing countries by helping young people to identify business opportunities, prepare their business plans and compete for the best ideas. This fund will support young entrepreneurs to participate in the Business Plan competition and the winners will be provided small-scale risk capital, start-up funding, credit and loan guarantees, and innovative business development services to start their businesses.

(2) Build the capacity of the YES Leaders To generate an in-country infrastructure of youth-led networks to disseminate information, develop programs, be advocates for innovative policies, and implement projects that promote youth employment and leadership. Currently there are over 80 YES Country Networks in various stages of development. They will be provided leadership and entrepreneurship training to help them develop the systems and partnerships needed to generate youth employment.

(3) Organize the 3 remaining YES Summits (Azerbaijan 2008, TBD 2010, Alexandria 2012): To continue to hold and maintain a burning focus on the issue of youth unemployment on the global agenda: we do this by convening stakeholders at our Global Summits which have been held in Egypt 2002, Mexico 2004 and Kenya 2006. The next one in 2008 is in Azerbaijan. At these Summits – the youth delegates meet with experts, donors, practitioners, and other stakeholders to develop program and polices that will help build in-country capacity to provide the education, training and other services needed by young people to find productive work.

(4) Develop the Youth Social Entrepreneurship progra m this program will provide the practical training and development services for engaging and inspiring young people to ‘be the change they want to see’. It will take the lessons learnt and pathways unfolding through the work of the YES Leaders over the last 8 years to become a leading program for building the capacity of young people to be change makers. It aims to become a source for innovative and creative solutions for action in the social sector. All of the programs offered will have a theoretical and a project based approach to learning. It will be organiced through the Institute for Youth Social Entepreneurship a joint partnership of YES Inc. and Cambridge College. …All good ideas are pipe-dreams if not backed by committed leadership and investment – we are seeking yours. We have spent the last five years placing the issue of youth employment on the global agenda, making a call for action, building coalitions, and piloting good ideas. We need your help to move the Youth Employment Campaign to the next level to our shared passion for generating youth employment to the resources that can make it happen. We have uncovered bubbling youth leadership and drive; identified promising sectors for employment generation; enrolled world leaders; built partnerships; discovered quantifiable, innovative and practical solutions; and overseen the development of world -wide youth networks that provide the perfect vehicle for unleashing the talents and energies of youth to create sustainable livelihoods. With your active involvement we can make a world of difference in the lives of thousands of youth in developing countries around the globe. We invite you to make a difference

…After the final no there comes a yes and on that YES the future of the world hangs…” Wallace Stevens (1879 – 1955)

68

About Bib Alex

69

About YES Egypt Sustainable Development Association SDA, the YES Egypt host Agency, based in Alexandria, developed a long term Action Plan to engage the Egyptian youth in several activities in order to raise their capacities through the available opportunities all over the world. It has been made possible through creating or participating in long term partnerships as the Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP), which allows SDA to have direct cooperation with various leading ICT institutions, there are the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology, and the Egyptian Federation for youth, among others. We also need to mention that SDA/YES Egypt and other civil organizations established the Egyptian Youth NGOs Federation, and the Egyptian Youth Consultant Group for the National Youth Policy for Youth Employment with the Support of H.E. Mrs. Aicha Abdel Hady Minster of Manpower and Migration in cooperation with the Youth Employment Network YEN/ILO and other various stakeholders. This year 2007, SDA/YES Egypt has a plan to raise the awareness among students in the preparatory schools. YES Egypt Network is actually creating a structure between schools in Alexandria, where the university students and graduates will provide solid information about the job market opportunities and challenges, allowing the young generation can take its chances on solid bases. Now that almost half of the YES Campaign Decade is over, this project is in its preparation stages to be lunched in September 2007 in cooperation with the Ministry of Education. Additionally, thanks to the support of the World Bank Public Information Center, YES Egypt, is also lunching the International Model of United Nation (AIMUN) in focus of Sustainable Development in countries emerging out of conflicts, followed by a mass capacity building program across Egypt, to inform youth about the Word Bank o pportunities, researches and the Global Challenges. 2008 and 2009 are appearing as good years, too. By the dates, YES Egypt is lunching a program for young women from excluded areas to be informed and trained about ICT opportunities. This initiative has been approved by The Anna Lindh Foundation and Digital Opportunity Trust. And in cooperation with the Anna Lindh Foundation, SDA/YES Egypt will host 2 major projects, the first one in July 2007 which is the water campaign ( the BIG Jump ) that aims to raise the awareness about water issues and environmental awareness, which is implemented in 6 different locations all at the same time in Jordan river , France, Spain , Italy and Morocco beside Alexandria which is implemented through the SDA Another project which will be implemented in Alexandria next November 2007 titled (Crossroad of Cultures) with youth participants from Spain , Czeck Republic , Turkey , Netherlands , Tunisia and Egypt to demonstrate a cultural festival in Alexandria, at the same time a big number of projects are implemented and going on within SDA members and Staff. More then 200 SDA members have participated in wide number of projects and capacity building program in more than 30 countries since the establishment of YES Egypt. This is all a result of well established training tools and specialists to increase the knowledge amongst other youth in Egypt. In 2005, H.E. Mrs., Suzan Mubarak, First Lady of Egypt, honored the Euro-Med Youth Award from the European Commission, which one of prizes was won by SDA.

70

About SDA46 Sustainable Development Association (SDA) is a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) based in Alexandria, Egypt. SDA gives a hand to young people to let each encountered resistance to their goals, and overcame the tremendous odds against them to discover the new horizons of opportunities at local, national, and international levels. We work tirelessly for young people paving them the way for a better future. We were officially registered in 2003, and our board is considered to be one of the youngest and most dynamic in the country. Our main objectives are to encourage and enable youth, by identifying the key problems facing them and their society, and to give them the necessary skills to address these problems. The organization complements the school and the family, filling needs not met by either. At the organization young people discover the world beyond the classroom. They develop self-knowledge, and the need to explore and to know more. The SDA helps young people to develop intellectually and socially. The SDA is a challenge for adults as well. It is a way to improve understanding between generations. In the service of young people, adults receive valuable training and experience adding to their own personal development. Our vision is to create a society in which young people play an active role, and in which their needs and desires are fully represented, respected, and achieved. We see SDA as a dynamic, innovative social movement with good resources, simple structures, and democratic decision making processes in which organization, management and communication are effective at all levels, and work together to achieve our objectives. Our mission is to contribute to the education of young people, and to help build a better generation in which young people are self-fulfilled as individuals and play a constructive role in society. This is achieved by:

o Meeting the needs and aspirations of young people. o Focusing on the distinctive contribution SDA can make to the education

of young people, particularly through indirect and non-formal methods. o Reaching out to more young people by encouraging participation. o Attracting and retaining well qualified staff and consultants with

experience in youth issues. o Working with others to better serve young people, by enabling each

individual to become the principal agent of his or her own development as a self-reliant, supportive, responsible and committed person.

o Assisting young people to establish a value system based upon humane social and personal principles.

46 www.sda -web.org

71

About Author Ahmed Youssry, is deputy YES regional coordinator for Middle East - North Africa Region, Programs Manager at SDA Sustainable Development Association, civil society activist, free-lancer writer, artist and blogger. Youssry currently is a student in the Faculty of Engineering- Alexandria University- Civil Department, received trainings on Strategic planning, capacity building, fundraising and conflict resolution. Youssry is an activist and affiliated with several initiatives in educational reform, capacity building programs and workshops, freelance trainer in mind mapping, campaigning and creative thinking. Having work experience in the field of construction in the Egyptian context in "Construction House Company" and was responsible for three construction sites, during which Youssry attend several trainings in Management and contract negotiations. Youssry joined SDA in 2004 leading conferences' logistics support on a voluntary base; Youssry started his professional carrier in development starting from August 2005 as a program coordinator in SDA, serving in several projects simultaneously, making documentations, trainer and coordinator. In august 2006, Youssry become Programs manager in SDA, giving s upport in fundraising, draft strategies, and liaison with media. Youssry is a freelance writer in his personal blog47, where he discusses civil society issues and society problems.

47 www.bahgaga.blogspot.com