Day 6: Managing the hell out of ideas

During one of our first classes in DC (which now feels like a lifetime ago), Dr. Vyas asked us to introduce ourselves and share why we'd registered for the class. I recalled an "a-ha" moment I had during a Net Impact conference back in 2005 when a speaker said something along the lines of "I don't think I'll have the next big idea. But I can manage the hell out of the process." YES. That was a key moment early in my career as I began to think about the role I wanted to play in development. Over the years, it's boiled down to something like this: I want to link social entrepreneurs to the resources, networks and tools they need to develop their ideas and bring them to scale. Monday was going to be a big day for me, since we'd be meeting with two organizations - UnLtd India and Acumen Fund - that do just that. I eagerly anticipated what each organization would have to say because of what I view as a shared philosophy - the problem isn't a lack of good ideas - the problem is that most good ideas don't get off the ground because an idea plus passion without some serious management acumen will get you a whole lot of nothing.

First up was UnLtd India and a presentation by Pooja Warier and her colleagues. Here are some things that really struck me about UnLtd's presentation:

• UnLtd has an exceedingly clear vision statement. Hearing Pooja talk about the gap UnLtd is filling (support between the concept stage and semi-maturity), UnLtd's organizational goals (identifying stars at the nat'l level, leaders at the state level and fostering a general culture of changemakers), and the characteristics they seek in social entrepreneurs was an excellent reminder that engaging in/supporting social entrepreneurship takes a lot of up-front thought and clarity of purpose.
• UnLtd embraces their "failures", or people who's ideas don't make it to the "star" or "leader" level. While the romantic view of social change is that it's spontaneous, it actually takes a ton of planning, stops and starts, and big old mistakes. I can't recommend the following book, that I picked up in the Mumbai airport en route to Delhi, enough- Adapt: Why Success Always Starts with Failure. Mohammed Yunus' first development project was a huge flop - who knew?! As a proposal writer, I have an often singular focus on what worked - what impact did we have? what did we do that was right? I think UnLtd is really onto something by creating a space where it's OK to say "man that was a disaster and here's what we learned"
• UnLtd doesn't focus on a particular sector or group of sectors. If someone has an idea that is not religiously or politically affiliated, they're eligible for support from UnLtd. This approach has pros and cons. On the plus side, some ideas are stifled by others' (read funders mostly) need to put them in a neat category with a bow tied around it. Abstaining from forcing ideas into boxes let's them be exactly what they are, and not what a funder, or manager, or communications person writing a fact sheet wants them to be. It also contributes to UnLtd's larger goal of creating a general culture of creative problem solving in India. On the other hand, there's something to be said for doing a few things well and going deep. Even though UnLtd's staff provide chiefly management expertise, some technical expertise is surely needed. By not focusing and being a "jack of all trades", is UnLtd then a "master of none"?

Next up was Acumen Fund with a discussion on their model and health portfolio. Acumen is different from UnLtd in two key respects: exclusive focus on for-profit enterprises, development of a portfolio in key technical areas (such as health, agriculture, and energy). Like UnLtd, Acumen is filling a gap by providing capital and technical assistance to social entrepreneurs with promising ideas that can be brought to scale. They emphasize their application of "patient capital" that fills a gap left by traditional investment models that require faster and larger returns than fledgling social enterprises can likely produce. Here are some of the highlights from our conversation with Acumen:

• Need does not equal demand. Brilliant and devastatingly simple. A social entrepreneur may have a brilliant model for delivering clean water to rural households with a well thought out business plan. The water is at a price point that people can afford. A delivery system removes the barrier of walking several miles to the water source. Clean water will reduce health problems in communities. But what if no one is buying?! What may be needed is a model that combines the business know-how of Acumen with the social marketing skills of PSI (see Day 7's post!). Food for thought...
• Measuring social impact is hard! This is a no-brainer, but we had a really interesting conversation about who's responsibility it is to measure the impact of Acumen programs. Even though enterprises are screened with a set of criteria that includes"social impact" it seemed that rigorous impact evaluation of investments could be strengthened.

As my classmates predicted, I was blissed out during our meetings on Monday and had a bit of an afterglow throughout the evening. These organizations are utilizing a model that I think holds a lot of promise. It was an affirming day for me - but also a reminder that I have a lot to learn and more questions than I know what to do with!