Description
Submission form – with using an attached Word template
Volume – over 800 words within 8 pages with including figures, charts, tables, references, etc.
Criteria for Marking>
Appropriateness: Is the format appropriate? – 5 points
Balance: Is the entire balance good? – 5 points
Validity: Is the case appropriate as the social venture? – 5 points
Richness: Does the report include enough contents for readers to understand? –5 points
Feasibility : Can the idea of the report implement actually? – 5 points
Knowledge utilization : Does the report use suitable information in the classes? – 10 points
You should never think about the problems around you. If you are one of beneficiaries, that business likely doesn’t match the social business. That probability is so high. In such case, you can never get a good evaluation.
3.If there are existing services and/or products, you might not get a good evaluation. Similar cases are OK when you clarify the differences.
4.You should focus on ‘Can your social business save the people who are struggling the daily life by suffering the shortage of foods, drinks, or/and other daily living goods’.
5.You should better use some frameworks, templates, charts, tables, photos, and other materials which you learned in the classes.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
2023 Fall semester ‘Social Entrepreneurship EA’ Final Report
Student Number：
Student Name：
◆ Business name (Brand name) ：
◆ Country：
Region (City, County, Town, Village, etc.) ：
1. Compass (Mission, Vision, Value, Value proposition)
(****words).
2. Solution for the problems (products and/or services)
(****words).
3. Beneficiaries (Consumers, Customers, Users, etc.)
(****words).
4. Channels (Process mapping or Distribution Model)
(****words).
5. Key partners (stakeholders)
(****words).
6. Funding (Private, Government Commercial income etc.)
(****words).
7. Social Media Usage (Social Networks, Communities, etc.)
(****words).
8. Outcome Evaluation (Indicators in the dashboard)
(****words).
9. Expected barriers to overcome
(****words).
10. Summary (Outline, Overview, Profile, etc.)
1 / 2
(****words).
2 / 2
Social Entrepreneurship EA
th
12 -Measuring impact2023FALL 2Q
APM S. FUJII
Abstract-14 classes
1. Definition of social entrepreneurship
2. Emergence of social entrepreneurs
3. Perspective of social entrepreneurship
10.Market strategy
4. Global comparison
11.Delivering the solution
5. Behavior and orientation
6. Discovering and creating opportunities 12.Measuring impact
13.Funding the venture
7. Co-creating with the community
14.New media and social
8. Designing the solution
entrepreneurship
9. Personal Presentation
15.Final report (no classes)
2
Schedule-14 classes
9. (11th JAN)
10. Market strategy (11th JAN)
11.Delivering the solution (18th JAN)
12.Measuring impact (18th JAN)
->18th JAN : Final-report questioning
13.Funding the venture (25th JAN)
14.New media and social entrepreneurship (25th JAN)
->3rd FEB : Deadline of Final-report
3
The whole class structure of SE
Elements of SE (leaf)
Opportunities (6th)
Community(7th)
Solution(8th)
Market strategy(10th)
Base of SE (stem)
Global
Comparison (4th)
Distribution (11th)
Perspective (3rd) Emergence (2nd)
Definition (1st)
Measuring (12th)
Funding (13th)
Behavior and
orientation (5th)
Communication(14th)
4
12th class: Measuring impact
1. Targeting Success
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
5
1. Targeting Success
◆ Theory to Results: Entrepreneurs social impact is the basis
of all they do; it is the purpose of their work. Most of the
time, in a typical commercial venture, profit is the main
indicator of success. This is used to evaluate the growth of
the start-up, its customer base, its sales, and its penetration
into the market. In social venture , the goal is social change,
and entrepreneurs need to find a metric to capture and
track that. Determining whether social outcomes have
improved and people have been empowered requires a lot
more creativity. Entrepreneurs need more than indicator to
measure the health, growth, and success of the social
venture.
6
1. Targeting Success
◆ Theory to Results: This class focuses on the characteristics
of robust social impact metrics, providing examples from
existing social ventures. The term social impact metrics is
often used interchangeably with other common terms,
including success indicators, success metrics, impact
metrics, or performance indicators. The idea behind these
terminologies is that the act of achieving success in the
social venture comes hand in hand with the acts of
measuring and demonstrating success.
◆ An easy way to internalize the meanings of these different
terms is to go back to the core of the words: a metric is
simply a measure. It is used to indicate success.
7
1. Targeting Success
◆ Different Metrics for different fields: Different
organization in different field of work have measured
success in different ways. Educators measure educational
outcomes, like the learning objectives in a course students
have taken, and the assignments students performed that
are graded to reflect whether students are reaching those
objectives. Healthcare providers measure health outcomes,
like clients’ heart’s functioning and the results that
indicate whether it’s functioning well. Financial investors
measure investment outcomes, namely, the financial
return on their investment.
8
12th class: Measuring impact
1. Targeting Success
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
9
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Framework for Venture Evaluation: In the most general sense,
organizational effectiveness can be defined as doing well
according to some kind of standard. Effectiveness, therefore,
always involves comparison either between organizations or
between time periods or standards within a given organization.
Effectiveness is one of the most important determinates of the
success of an organization and, over the years, devising ways
to assess or evaluate effectiveness has been a major focus for
organizational scholars and practitioners.
10
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Framework for Venture Evaluation: Although it sounds simple,
the evaluation of effectiveness is complicated due to the variety
of standards that have been proposed by for its evaluation by
those inside as well as outside the organization.
◆ Moreover, these standards can be conflicting, making the
assessment of effectiveness potentially divisive. Especially for
nonprofit organizations with a multitude of stakeholders with
different values and criteria for success, effectiveness is
essentially a social construction.
11
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Framework for Venture Evaluation: Early attempts at
organizational evaluation tended to focus on measuring one
particular aspect of organizational performance, such as
resource acquisition, internal processes, or goal
accomplishment. Although each of these provides information
about an important aspect of organizational functioning, each
by itself is also limited. Measures of inputs can reveal how
successful an organization is in exploiting its environment, but
they do not tell us what, if anything, the inputs get used for.
12
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Framework for Venture Evaluation
13
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Framework for Venture Evaluation: In general, single-factor
approaches to evaluation are usually inadequate, given that
overall performance and effectiveness are normally based on a
number of internal as well as external factors and on values as
well as objective facts. This necessitates a more encompassing
view of effectiveness. This was demonstrated empirically in a
study of thirty-three social ventures, which found that their
success in goal accomplishment and resource acquisition
depended on these factors:
14
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Framework for Venture Evaluation:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Previous entrepreneurial and management experience
Capital and staff available at the establishment stage
Standing the market test (charging fees or getting contracts)
Venture promotion
The venture’s social network
Long-term cooperation with other organizations
Venture acceptance in the public discourse
15
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Logic Model and the Evaluation of internal Processes and Results
The evaluations are important tests of both our internal
processes and the theory of change itself. If outcomes and
impacts are as expected, we can have more confidence that we
understand how to positively influence human and social
behavior. If outcomes and impacts are not as expected,
however, we must first be sure that the programs were
carried out correctly before we lose confidence in our theory of
change. We can assess the way programs were designed and
carried out through the evaluation of internal processes.
The next figure illustrates how a logic model relates to
internal activities, external results, and type of evaluation16.
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Logic Model and the Evaluation of internal Processes and Results
Inputs
Activities
Organizational Boundary
Normal Data Horizon
Outputs
Zone1
Program Administration
Evaluation of Internal Process
Zone2
Evaluation of Short-Term Outcomes
Outcomes
(Outcome Goals)
Zone3
Evaluation of Long-Term Outcomes
Impacts
Evaluation of Impacts
(Impact Goals)
17
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Logic Model and the Evaluation of internal Processes and
Results:
Zone 1:Internal organizational activities
In this zone, internal process evaluation can be used to
assess whether programs have been appropriately set up,
based on the theory of change. For example, does an
educational program have teaching staff with required
expertise, and is the necessary educational material
available (activities)? Also, are the needed numbers of
class hours delivered to the appropriate students
(outputs)? Administrative records and other data can be
used for these evaluations.
18
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Logic Model and the Evaluation of internal Processes and Results:
Zone 2 & 3: The results of organizational programs
Organizational outcomes are changes brought about in
program participants. Outcomes can occur in the short or long
term. Impacts are more fundamental change occurring in
organizations, communities, or systems as a result of program
activity. Both of these should be clearly spelled out in the
theory of change. An important consideration is how outcomes
and impacts can be measured. What is noteworthy here is that
organizations normally gather some information on short-term
outcomes; for example, student grades after the completion of
an educational course.
19
12th class: Measuring impact
1. Targeting Success
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
20
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Value-Based Model: The evaluation standards have a social
basis. Therefore, in assessing effectiveness, the values of
important organizational constituencies and stakeholders
must be taken into account. This is all the more important
for social ventures, since they are based on the production of
social value. One model, the competing values framework,
sees organizational effectiveness as a value-based judgment
about the performance of the organization. As shown in next
figure, the competing values framework cross-classifies two
value dimensions: the value placed on flexibility versus
focus, and the value placed on internal systems versus
21
external positioning.
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
Individuality Flexibility
Long-term Change
New Change
Incremental
Maintenance
External
Positioning
Stability Control
Fast Change
Incremental Change
22
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
The quadrants of the diagram identify four models of
organizational performance. Each model is characterized by a
distinctive culture, orientation, leadership type, value drivers,
and theory of effectiveness.
The factors underlying the models will be weighted
differently by different individuals and coalitions within an
organization. Each will therefore favor a particular model or
model ranking and therefore favor certain criteria for
effectiveness. Given the bargaining that organizational
coalitions normally need to do, organizations will likely need to
adopt some aspect of each model.
23
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
An examination of the four models indicates that the model
in the top right quadrant is the most appropriate for
entrepreneurship. This model is labeled “New Change”; it has
also been referred to as an “open systems” model.
Organizations using this model are characterized by
innovation, entrepreneurship, vision, responsiveness, and
change. These will hence become standards for the evaluation
of effectiveness. Therefore social entrepreneurs, with their
focus on mission and social value definition and delivery,
should be sure that this model is given a strong emphasis in
organizational performance and evaluation.
24
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
Long-term
Change
New Change
“Long-term Change”
Stability Control
Fast Change
Culture Type: Clan
Orientation: Collaborate
Leader Type: Facilitator, Mentor, Teambuilder
Value: Commitment
Drivers: Communication, Development
Theory of Effectiveness: Human development and high
commitment produce effectiveness.
25
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
Long-term Change
New
Change
“New Change”
Stability Control
Fast Change
Culture Type: Adhocracy
Orientation: Create
Leader Type: Innovator, Entrepreneur Visionary
Value: Innovative outputs
Drivers: Transformation, Agility
Theory of Effectiveness: Innovativeness, vision, and constant
change produce effectiveness.
26
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
Long-term Change
New Change
“Stability Control”
Stability
Fast Change
Culture Type: Hierarchy
Control
Orientation: Control
Leader Type: Coordinator, Monitor, Organizer
Value: Efficiency
Drivers: Timeless, Consistency and Uniformity
Theory of Effectiveness: Control and efficiency with capable
processes produce effectiveness.
27
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Competing values framework
Long-term Change
New Change
“Fast Change”
Fast
Stability
Control
Culture Type: Market
Change
Orientation: Compete
Leader Type: Hard-driver, Competitor, Producer
Value: Market Share
Drivers: Goal Achievement, Profitability
Theory of Effectiveness: Aggressively competing and
customer focus produce effectiveness.
28
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Stakeholder Satisfaction Model: A more general stakeholder
satisfaction model can take the values of a variety of
stakeholders into account. In addition to the managers just
considered, a variety of other stakeholders are likely to be
important to organizations. For nonprofits, a partial listing
would include employees, volunteers, board members, client
groups, government regulators, donors, customers, partners,
and competitors. The satisfaction of any or all stakeholders
could be used to assess the effectiveness of an organization.
Organizations clearly need to pay attention to important
stakeholders; however, stakeholder satisfaction models
become more complex as the number and diversity of
stakeholders increases.
29
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Stakeholder Satisfaction Model: For example, in Phase
Three of Year Up’s program, stakeholders would include its
management, the program participants, corporate partners,
and public-sector leaders. These stakeholders are likely to
have differing priorities. Year Up may, for example, want to
maximize its public funding, whereas public leaders are
likely to want to spend as little public money as possible.
Also, program graduates will want high wages, whereas
corporations will likely want to keep labor costs down. To
address this, organizations can profile the nature and
strength of each stakeholder’s interest in the organization as
well as the stakeholder’s ability to influence the organization.
30
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard: was
formulated by Kaplan and Norton to translate
organizational mission and strategy into objectives and
measures that can be used to assess effectiveness. The
scorecard was originally designed for for-profit
organizations. It assumed that the primary goal of a
business is long-rum profit maximization, which can be
achieved through a balance of performance attributes. The
scorecard considers organizational performance on four
dimensions, or perspectives, which are seen as drivers of
current and future success.
31
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard:
32
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard:
Financial perspective. Summarizes the readily
measurable economic consequences of actions already
taken. Indicates whether a company’s strategy,
implementation, and execution are contributing to
bottom-line improvement.
Customer perspective. Identifies the customer and
market segments in which the business competes and
measures performance in these segments. Enables the
articulation of customer and market-based strategy
that will deliver superior future financial returns.
33
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard:
Internal-business process perspective. Identifies the
critical internal processes in which the organization
must excel. Focuses on those that will have the
greatest impact on customer satisfaction and
achieving financial objectives.
Learning and growth perspective. Identifies the
infrastructure (people, systems, procedures) the
organization must build to create long-term growth
and improvement in the other perspectives.
34
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard: *
35
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard: *
36
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard: *
37
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard:
Organizational dashboards are another balanced method for
assessing effectiveness. A dashboard is a performance
evaluation tool that provides a high-level overview of the
progress of key activities and initiatives toward annual
objectives and strategic priorities.
Dashboards are designed to identify and report critical key
objectives, indicators, and projects or tasks needed to steer an
organization toward its mission. The dashboard analogy is
used because the indicators should allow management to keep
its eye on what is most important to steer the organization. As
such, they facilitate the management of processes needed to
38
enhance performance and effectiveness.
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
◆ Multi- Attribute Approaches-Balanced Scorecard:
The dashboard includes five dimensions spanning short- to longterm measures:
• Current results: Monthly checking of progress against key targets
• Underlying performance: Annual reviews of appropriateness and
cost-effectiveness of programs and support functions.
• Risks: Monitoring ways the organization may be put in jeopardy.
• Assets and capabilities: Annual review of capacity to deliver future
performance.
• Change projects: Regular reporting on initiatives the trustees or
senior team are supervising directly.
39
12th class: Measuring impact
1. Targeting Success
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
40
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Evaluating outcomes and impacts: Evaluating outcomes and
impacts is often far from simple. As the next figure shows, it
entails measuring what happens to individuals, groups, or
communities after the organization’s programs are delivered.
◆ As time goes by, this becomes more difficult for a number of
reasons. The scope of the factors to be measured grows, and
the data needed gets more difficult to collect. Short- and
intermediate-term changes in program participants
(outcomes) are likely to be both more specific and easier to
measure than the fundamental or long-term changes in
communities or systems (impacts) that result.
41
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
Samples 1, 2,3
◆ Outcome evaluation :
42
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Outcome evaluation :
43
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Outcome evaluation examines the direct effects of
programs on participants and should provide insight into
how to improve programs.
◆ Impact evaluation seeks to assess broad, long-term
changes that occur as a result of a program. An impact
evaluation may, for example, show that lower rates of
community-wide solid waste accumulation were the direct
result of a school environmental program promoting
community recycling and composting behaviors. Although
the outcomes of an environmental education program just
listed could be evaluated fairly quickly, it will likely be
much longer before the impact takes effect.
44
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Evaluation Research Designs: Outcome and impact
evaluation requires data on the degree to which program
goals were realized. These goals have to do with changes
brought about in recipients, groups, or communities
through program activities. Consequently, data on change
attributable to program activity must be obtained.
◆ A variety of data collection designs are available. They
compare outcomes and impacts with what would have
happened without the program. Harrell and colleagues
provide a good overview of these designs. They vary in
terms of the degree to which causation can be inferred.
45
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Evaluation Research Designs: To show that program
activity caused behavior change, it is necessary to show
that the behavior change varied in tandem with the
program activity (covariation), that the program took
place before the behavior changed (proper time order), and
that the behavior change was not caused by any other
factors (non-spuriousness). The first two conditions can
usually be dealt with in a fairly straightforward manner
through program design. The final requirement, however,
may be extremely difficult to address.
◆ Experimental designs have been developed to explicitly
address all three requirements.
46
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Evaluation Research Designs:
✓ Covariation :the behavior change varied in tandem with
the program activity
✓ Proper time order :the program took place before the
behavior changed
✓ Non-spuriousness :the behavior change was not caused
by any other factors.
◆ The first two conditions can usually be dealt with in a
fairly straightforward manner through program design.
The final requirement, however, may be extremely
difficult to address. Experimental designs have been
developed to explicitly address all three requirements.
47
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
◆ Evaluation Research Designs: Savings and avoided
emissions can’t be directly measured. The shaded area
between the graphs shows estimated energy savings due
to the program.
48
12th class: Measuring impact
1. Targeting Success
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
49
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
◆ Assigns monetary value to program outcomes or
impacts.
◆ Provides a number of advantages:
✓Comparison of ventures
✓Combining value of ventures
✓Calculation of efficiency
✓Communication with stakeholders
◆ Important to note that not all benefits may be
monetizable.
50
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
• Cost benefit analysis : requires comprehensive
measurement of cost and program impacts
– Includes primary, secondary, direct, indirect,
tangible, intangible
– Net benefits to participant stakeholders and society
• Social return on investment (SROI): calculates blended
value, composed of
– Enterprise value: revenue from business activities
– Social purpose value: monetized value of venture for
society
51
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
• Examples of problems in monetization…
• www.robinhood.org – Reducing poverty in NYC
Why is it hard to monetize the above?
What might they be able to monetize?
52
12th class: Measuring impact
1. Targeting Success
2. Social Venture Effectiveness
3. Approaches to Social Venture Effectiveness
4. Outcome and Impact Evaluation
5. Monetizing Outcome and Impact
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
53
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
• Besides evidence of venture effectiveness, scaling
requires organizational capacity and resources. Paul
Bloom ‘s SCALERS model includes effectiveness in
seven areas. These may be needed, depending on the
details of what is being scaled and the type of scaling
being considered.
✓ Staffing: filling positions needed to address any changes
made
✓ Communicating: persuading key stakeholders that the
change strategy is worth adopting and/or supporting
54
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
• SCALERS model
✓ Alliance-building: forging linkages to bring about desired
changes
✓ Lobbying: advocating for government changes that work in
favor of the organization
✓ Earnings-generation: generating earnings to support the
change
✓ Replicating: reproducing the programs and initiatives that
the organization has originated
✓ Stimulating market forces: creating incentives that
encourage private interest
55
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
◆ Framework for Scaling Social Impact:
56
6. Increasing Social Venture Impact: Scaling
• Framework for Scaling Social Impact:
✓ Scaling can be indirect or direct.
✓ Indirect methods
• Are simpler and faster than direct.
• Try to elicit others to bring about change.
• Could lobby, raise public awareness, organize network.
✓ Direct methods
• Provide services in other geographical areas.
• Require resources and a transferable program model.
• Could use promotion, affiliation, or branching.
57
References
⚫ Chahine, T. (2016). Introduction to social entrepreneurship.
CRC Press.
⚫ Guo, C., & Bielefeld, W. (2014). Social entrepreneurship: An
evidence-based approach to creating social value. John Wiley &
Sons.
⚫ Gidron, B., & Hasenfeld, Y. (Eds.). (2012). Social enterprises: An
organizational perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
⚫ Bornstein, D., & Davis, S. (2010). Social Entrepreneurship:
What Everyone Needs to Know®. Oxford University Press.
58
Social Entrepreneurship EA
th
11 -Delivering the solution2023FALL 2Q
APM S. FUJII
Abstract-14 classes
1. Definition of social entrepreneurship
2. Emergence of social entrepreneurs
3. Perspective of social entrepreneurship
10.Market strategy
4. Global comparison
11.Delivering the
5. Behavior and orientation
solution
6. Discovering and creating opportunities
12.Measuring impact
7. Co-creating with the community
13.Funding the venture
8. Designing the solution
14.New media and social
9. Personal Presentation
entrepreneurship
2
Schedule-14 classes
9. (11th JAN)
10. Market strategy (11th JAN)
11.Delivering the solution (18th JAN)
12.Measuring impact (18th JAN)
->18th JAN : Final-report questioning
13.Funding the venture (25th JAN)
14.New media and social entrepreneurship (25th JAN)
->3rd FEB : Deadline of Final-report
3
The whole class structure of SE
Elements of SE (leaf)
Opportunities (6th)
Community(7th)
Solution(8th)
Market strategy(10th)
Base of SE (stem)
Global
Comparison (4th)
Distribution (11th)
Perspective (3rd) Emergence (2nd)
Definition (1st)
Measuring (12th)
Funding (13th)
Behavior and
orientation (5th)
Communication(14th)
4
11th class: Delivering the solution
1. Operations and distribution
2. Distribution models
3. Success factors across distribution models
4. Strategic partnerships
5
1. Operations and distribution
◆ What is operations: Management of the different pieces of
the supply chain is what we are referring to when we use the
word operations – it is the functioning of the social venture,
the processes required to get to the outcomes the
entrepreneurs are aiming for. Operations refers to the day-today activities required to produce and deliver the solution.
These will depend on the distribution model and other
aspects of the multidimensional market strategy.
◆ This not only helps the entrepreneurs ensure the results that
are so critical to reaching the social impact targets, it also
helps entrepreneurs set up the venture in a streamlined way,
minimizing resources and maximizing output.
6
1. Operations and distribution
◆ Process Mapping : Process mapping refers to the clarification
of how exactly the moving parts of the product or service will
flow between these different components to get the final end
goal. The result is literally step-by-step description of the
core operations, similar to a recipe or instructions manual for
the team.
◆ This includes distribution. At the start of the journey,
entrepreneurs define the “last mile,” that missing gap that is
preventing end users from overcoming this social challenge.
7
1. Operations and distribution
◆ Process Mapping : Process maps can help
entrepreneurs make sure that nothing falls
through the cracks; they also help
entrepreneurs chart out the resources
entrepreneurs will need and the room for
growth. Process maps need to be revisited
in the future as social venture organization
grows to figure out what redundant steps
can be eliminated, enhanced, or improved.
They can also change as entrepreneurs
refine the distribution channels.
8
1. Operations and distribution
◆ Process Mapping :samples
9
1. Operations and distribution
◆ Process Mapping :samples
10
11th class: Delivering the solution
1. Operations and distribution
2. Distribution models
3. Success factors across distribution models
4. Strategic partnerships
11
2. Distribution models
◆ Distribution Models :The simplest model of distribution
entails taking the same package – the core product or service and offering it to more people. To do this, entrepreneurs will
need to carefully think through the processes this would entail.
Even if entrepreneurs have created a standardized package
that does not need tailoring and can be replicated across
subpopulations and geographies, entrepreneurs may have to
customize the marketing, pricing, or other aspects that vary
across location. Depending on the product or service,
entrepreneurs pick and choose the most relevant components
for them.
12
2. Distribution models
◆ Expanding Central Production Volume : Expanding the
central production volume can carry the advantages of
increasing efficiencies and reducing costs per unit produced or
transaction served. Key challenges to look out for are building
systems to maintain quality assurance and creating loops
between management and frontline. Hiring team members
specialized in monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and creating
a data management and analytics platform for them can help
entrepreneurs ensure consistent quality. Monitoring both the
operations (how things are done) and outcomes (the results
are been getting) should be needed.
13
2. Distribution models
◆ Opening New Branches: New branches might be very
similar to the original branch or might have different
characteristics. They might offer modified products or
services or additional products or services. This depends
on the nature of the population entrepreneurs are trying
to reach, the influence of local context on the nature of the
work, and the test results at each location. In many ways,
it is like going from one pilot to several new pilots.
14
2. Distribution models
◆ Franchising: Franchising means that rather than trying
to produce more yourself or serve more yourself, the
partner with other organizations to replicate venture
model. In the commercial sector, entrepreneurs can
franchise the venture to an individual willing to take it on
and build it from scratch. In the social sector, it is
recommended to franchise to an existing organization that
has already determined viability as a social purpose
organization. In most cases, entrepreneurs can receive a
franchising fee, however will be responsible for continuous
guidance and training to ensure consistency and quality. 15
2. Distribution models
◆ Franchising : Advantages of franchising are that it
require fewer resources to deliver the solution to a larger
audience because the franchisee is carrying the burden. It
also allows entrepreneurs to leverage existing networks,
relationships , and systems in communities the
entrepreneurs have not entered yet.
◆ Key challenges to look out for when franchising include
the importance of selecting a franchisee with a mission
that is aligned to entrepreneurs, and organizational
culture that is amenable to replicating the impact.
16
2. Distribution models
◆ Micro-franchising : Micro franchising is a distribution
model that differs from the social franchising method. As
its name suggests, micro-franchising entails much smaller
units of replication. Rather than franchise the venture as
a whole, it is usually the last mile distribution that is
franchised.
◆ The micro-franchising model has been used to provide
access to basic goods and services at affordable costs and
foster creation . Samples are Fan Milk in Ghana, Natura
in Brazil, Kegg Farms in India and Blue
