Saba ahmed
View more presentations from ssssahmed.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid (In response)
When discussing social entrepreneurship, it is important to understand the hierarchy of the causes that need addressing and address them in the best understood order. This order is determined by criteria that need to be met, as in the example of diarrhoea which causes 2.2 million deaths/year. In this case, this is motivation enough to pursue a project and all approaches would follow along to meet the given objective.
Lifebuoy and the following case studies exemplify certain phenomenons that are worth discussing in the context of social entrepreneurship. This discussion is primarily about the private sectors’ involvement in attaining goals that solve societal problems. How the inclusion of private enterprise in the realm of social work can introduce new and effective methods for income generation and eventually poverty alleviation. This is said to have been done by creating markets and consumers out of the social poor and seeing those below the poverty line as an underutilised consumer base. This is facilitated also by, as in the case of Lifebuoy, expropriating a product to be particular to the targeted market and to understand and account for e.g., “rural behaviours and preferences” where need be.
The difficulty arises when there is a conflict of interest between corporate and social entities when it comes to collaborating as in the case of the PPP. It is true, that a branded campaign with auxiliary corporate goals and objectives can help strengthen the initiative being taken, but it is, as mentioned in the study, harder to gauge and justify than a simple business model where the primary goal is generating profit. The advantages are also plentiful as described in the model of the hybrid enterprise where all entities involved can pool in their collective resources and objectives to attain their respective goals. For example, Lifebuoy, measuring the cost of the hand-washing initiative in the number of people exposed to the information and advertising being broadcast and distributed, fares well for both the private and the social investors alike as an evaluation method.
“Turn the poorest of the poor into customers”. This statement is what seems to resonate most clearly throughout the article and during my reading of it, I was trying to understand how this may adapted to the class’ understanding and experience so far of how to approach and rectify social wrongs. The main differentiation is that the masses at the bottom of the pyramid have either been neglected or underestimated as a lucrative market. The existence of capital and however inadequate, yet existing forms of income generating employment, (more characteristic of urban environments) is distinctly different and is to be treated with the same applied particularity. In rural areas where there is almost no monetary income and less recycling of capital, a lot of the advantages that collaboration between the public and private sector bring to the platform are inherently rendered inadequate or unsustainable.
Lifebuoy and the following case studies exemplify certain phenomenons that are worth discussing in the context of social entrepreneurship. This discussion is primarily about the private sectors’ involvement in attaining goals that solve societal problems. How the inclusion of private enterprise in the realm of social work can introduce new and effective methods for income generation and eventually poverty alleviation. This is said to have been done by creating markets and consumers out of the social poor and seeing those below the poverty line as an underutilised consumer base. This is facilitated also by, as in the case of Lifebuoy, expropriating a product to be particular to the targeted market and to understand and account for e.g., “rural behaviours and preferences” where need be.
The difficulty arises when there is a conflict of interest between corporate and social entities when it comes to collaborating as in the case of the PPP. It is true, that a branded campaign with auxiliary corporate goals and objectives can help strengthen the initiative being taken, but it is, as mentioned in the study, harder to gauge and justify than a simple business model where the primary goal is generating profit. The advantages are also plentiful as described in the model of the hybrid enterprise where all entities involved can pool in their collective resources and objectives to attain their respective goals. For example, Lifebuoy, measuring the cost of the hand-washing initiative in the number of people exposed to the information and advertising being broadcast and distributed, fares well for both the private and the social investors alike as an evaluation method.
“Turn the poorest of the poor into customers”. This statement is what seems to resonate most clearly throughout the article and during my reading of it, I was trying to understand how this may adapted to the class’ understanding and experience so far of how to approach and rectify social wrongs. The main differentiation is that the masses at the bottom of the pyramid have either been neglected or underestimated as a lucrative market. The existence of capital and however inadequate, yet existing forms of income generating employment, (more characteristic of urban environments) is distinctly different and is to be treated with the same applied particularity. In rural areas where there is almost no monetary income and less recycling of capital, a lot of the advantages that collaboration between the public and private sector bring to the platform are inherently rendered inadequate or unsustainable.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)