Brett gave a great presentation today, sharing his experiences and trajectory developing www.onlyinpgh.com  and Scenable. My three take-away points were 1) Believe in yourself and your mission and let that conviction guide you like the "Pole/North Star" 2) Product development is hard. hence design your product/service (prototype) and test as soon as possible 3) In order to accomplish #2, Start small with what you know best, in a location that you know and care most about.

I reflected on his and Prof Zak's comments re: Mike Tyson's statement about receiving a "punch in the face". I found this article
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669246/a-small-businessmans-guide-to-innovating-like-the-pros
which led me to this site
http://www.innosight.com/innovation-resources/beating-the-odds-when-you-launch-a-new-venture.cfm
There is a link to an excellent Harvard Business Review article pdf that I hope you all read. It describes how to test assumptions and manage risks categorized by the authors into three categories - deal-killer risks (test and identify first), Path-dependent risks and high return-on-investment risks along the way. There is an excellent graph that shows how value rises when risks are mitigated in the correct sequence through test market (as opposed to the assumptions in a business plan).

I'm reconsidering reducing the scope and scale of my proposed venture considerably after listening to today's and presentation and reading the article above, to test my assumptions and hypotheses in a pilot. 

Mobile money transfers info from India for Courtney

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/news/telecom/Mobile-wallet-Indian-scenario/articleshow/12521335.cms

Hi Courtney, thought this may be of interest to you.
Sangeeta

E-Luma - A Convincing Presentation

Last week's class was very enjoyable and insightful! Paul and Anna did a terrific job at presenting E-Luma and I learned a lot from both what they did and didn't say both the pitch and the "failure" presentations.

Firstly, I think the concept is compelling to not only stakeholders who would invest in the project, but also (and more importantly) to the community members that would develop and utilize it. The E-Luma marketplace is made out of local, indigenous materials. It always amazes me how communities such as Sierra Leone, that are the most adversely impacted by climate change and that have the fewest resources to mitigate its effects, can pull together and sustain a way of living through such innovations. E-Luma has multiple benefits - both in its design as well as its purpose. Micro-entrepreneurs are encouraged to pursue ventures in a sustainable way. One feature that I found particularly interesting was that E-Luma is not solely for the purpose of sparking business ideas, it's also a community gathering spot. There is a structure (the name of it is slipping me!) that is meant to be in the middle of the village to encourage community members to sit and simply be exposed to the environment.

The presentation was filled with images to tell a story. We discussed this in class and it was evident that Paul and Anna were talking directly to us, and not to the slides.

Also, I really appreciated getting to know about the team's failures. It wasn't a smooth journey by any means and perseverance is key. Reflecting back on our teamwork conversation and having a plan B and a plan C when certain teammates fall through due to other time commitments is essential.

Strongly Led, Under-managed

After I read through the article on capacity building, I started looking looking for some case studies regarding this all-important aspect of non-profit management. I found an entire section on Capacity Building on the National Council of Nonprofits website. As always, one link led to another, and I came across this very interesting article titled "Strongly Led, Under-managed: How can visionary nonprofits make the critical transition to stronger management?", by The Bridgespan Group, that discussed how many nonprofits actually have very strong leadership, that is driven by their mission, but poor management skills than can effectively translate this vision to implementation.

The article defines "leadership as the set of activities required to articulate an organization’s vision and ensure that all of its stakeholders will support that vision. These activities include: setting the organization’s direction and envisioning its future; communicating with and aligning the stakeholders whose efforts and contributions are necessary for success; and motivating, inspiring, and energizing people throughout the organization."

The article defines "management as the set of activities required to ensure that an organization will reliably produce results, especially as it grows larger and/or becomes more complex. Management’s core activities include: goal setting and budgeting; establishing systems, organizational structures, and processes; and monitoring performance and problem-solving."

Based on these definitions, it seems almost obvious that vision and implementation skills are completely different, and both require different individuals (or teams of individuals) at the helm guiding the organization. As Paul (from eLuma) pointed out in class last week, their present Director was not even part of the initial team that came up with the idea for their venture, she joined in later and now leads the management team.

Why is it then that most nonprofits completely underestimate the power of a strong management team that can actually achieve the goals that make its mission? One of the critical reasons, the article points out to, is the lack of key metrics for assessing these goals as well as the lack of performance assessment. These are excellent indicators of whether the organization is actually on track for making the social impact and change that it set out to achieving.

Bootstrapping

During the e-luma presentation, Paul briefly mentioned the term "bootstrapping." This is a term that we should all be highly familiar with as we commence our ventures with limited financing.

Bootstrapping is the concept of minimizing the use of external financing in order to preserve ownership of the company. It involves maintaining a tight budget and using the resources one has as efficiently as possible. Bootstrapped ventures tend to have lean operations, in which almost all spending (including salary) is poured directly into the growth of the business.

By reducing the need for additional capital, entrepreneurs can boast significant savings just from financing costs alone. Capital is expensive - both debt and equity. Debt can cost founders up to 20% per year and is a very risky proposition if the venture is not generating stable cash flows. Equity is often considered even more expensive than debt. Each round of equity financing requires the founders to give up a certain portion of the company's ownership. By resisting the urge of raising additional equity for early-stage ventures, founders can maintain complete control of the business and further reduce the cost of equity for future rounds of financing. Additionally, fundraising takes time, in which preserving this effort will provide more time to focus on growing the business.

Bootstrapping is a widely practiced concept and is something we should all consider during the early stages of our ventures. As long as we have sufficient capital to operate, raising more money will only increase our financing costs and reduce the efficiency of our spending. Bootstrapping can be difficult, especially during the first 2-3 years of early-stage ventures; however, it will force us to dedicate ourselves and our capital to the success of our ventures.

Here are some common articles that discuss bootstrapping:

http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/201102
http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/55776
http://www.powerhomebiz.com/vol25/shoestring.htm

Reflecting on a great presentation on "e-luma"by Paul and Anna last week, I am still digesting the "shelled pistachios" I gathered from their talks and slides.
1) He cautioned us to have laser like focus on the mission while being flexible about strategy
2) Manage people effectively by being encouraging and welcoming, without turning away any one who wants to help, until they either become integral and earn your trust through their demonstrated action or show their self-interest and drift away when the going gets tough.
3) If ventures are being considered in distant places- the needs/talents of the locals are of prime importance
4) Plan for the long term - while 3-5 year financial plans may make sense for pitching to investors/venture capital, when you have a social mission you are actually not just creating a "business" you have to build community (usually a 10-15 year goal if not longer!)

I went back to visit two of my personal favorite social venture NGOs
http://www.barefootcollege.org/, http://challenge.bfi.org/winner_2010 - operation Hope

Scaling

Scaling a startup can be tricky, not enough growth can eat up capital quickly and too much growth can cannibalize a business. By focusing on technology and development or sales and marketing, companies can over establish themselves and then inevitably run through resources faster than they can be re-obtained. Resources being anything from relationships and partnerships to actual raw materials or capital. Some companies build a product and expect it to sell itself, others sell a concept and then expect to be able to build it, and neither of these focus on optimizing time and man power. Rather, companies should be focusing on internal operations. By providing services to customers, companies can establish brand loyalty over product loyalty and though building brand loyalty takes much more time, it results in much greater brand equity. Scaling a start up requires intense attention to internal operational efficiency.

Nate  

Growing the Number of People Employed in Your Venture

Our guest lecturer last week spent some time discussing the organizational structure of their social venture. He put up a slide depicting employees' positions within the organization, showing those with more power within an inner circle and those with less outside. He also spoke about how it takes time for new employees to gain trust and decision making availability within the venture. One problem he cited is the desire, especially of young people such as college students, to use the concept of working for a social venture to improve their resume and boost their appeal to other companies which they would like to be employed at. This discussion raised some questions in my mind about who you can really trust and who should be hired when expanding your social venture.

To me the biggest issue in expanding your infrastructure is aligning goals between the founders and those who became involved later. Since founders typically are emotionally, and financially, invested in the organization, they will have a larger stake in the potential success or failure of the venture. Meanwhile, newer employees could potentially care less about the goal of the venture leading to possible shirking of responsibilities and similar behavior. While I would like to believe in the good will of humanity, the chance that you hire people who potentially don't have the same goals as you is bound to happen and thus it is important that you know how to grow your organization in a smart fashion and continually improve the infrastructure.

An interesting article I found not only touching on this topic but also expanding on many issues we have covered this semester was written in the Harvard Business Review by Amar Bhide titled The Questions Every Entrepreneur Must Answer. In the later pages of the article, Amar gives helpful tips as to how to expand your organization. On page 128, the grey box specifically focuses on Investing in Organizational Infrastructure of your venture along the lines of delegating and specializing task of employees. Meanwhile page 129, begins a segment on the importance of articulating the organizational norms of your organization to employees. Another informative section I found extremely relevant was the changing role of the founder. Citing the example of Bill Gates, Amar talks about a piece by Michael Roberts which suggests that, "entrepreneur's role should evolve from doing the work, to prescribing desired results, and eventually to managing the overall context in which the work is done."

While this article has answered some of the initial questions that came to my mind after last weeks guest lecturer, I still worry about the process of aligning goals between founders and new employees. I would love any input people have on this matter.

The link to the article is below.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~aandrea/Emrich%20Visioning/Questions_Every_Entrepreneur_Should_Ask.pdf

The Power of Introverts

In this powerful Ted Talk, Susan Cain talks about the power of introverts, Cain talks about the role introverts can play on a team. I really appreciated this article, because it looks at how a diversity of personalities can contribute to a team. Personally, i'm an introvert and I've always felt extroverts were the only types of people that could be successful in social entrepreneurship. But this talk lies out some of the important qualities introverts hold. In the talk she says:

"And interesting research by Adam Grant at the Wharton School has found that introverted leaders often deliver better outcomes than extroverts do, because when they are managing proactive employees, they're much more likely to let those employees run with their ideas, whereas an extrovert can, quite unwittingly, get so excited about things that they're putting their own stamp on things, and other people's ideas might not as easily then bubble up to the surface."

I found this statement incredibly powerful because it spoke so well to a necessary need in an innovative space. Statements like this made me feel like I could be leader despite my introvertive ways.  I was incredibly inspired when Cain listed world leaders such has Gandhi, Rosa Parks and Eleanor Roosevelt has self proclaimed introverts. These were people who made measurable impact on the world, yet they were people like me who appreciated being alone in their thoughts.

What I liked the most about Cain's talk was her assertion that introversion spurs creativity.  While I do appreciate the collaborative model of working in groups, I best feel I can be creative and get the most out of my ideas when I am in solitude. This was an ethos Cain repeated throughout her TED talk, that idea that solitude matters and that is where the best ideas can sometimes come from. "Groups famously follow the opinions of the most dominant or charismatic person in the room, even though there's zero correlation between being the best talker and having the best ideas." By doubting introverts or not listening to their voice, while it may not be the loudest int he room, teams may be losing out on unique and out of the box solutions.

Here is the link to the video.

A Change for the Better?

One of the key lessons learned from the reading Effective Capacity Building in Non-Profit Organizations was resetting aspirations and strategy to improve an organization's capacity. Other class readings have also emphasized the need for entrepreneurs to be flexible when it comes to building one's venture due to unanticipated changes in the market, new market information, etc. Sometimes, these changes could result in an entirely new vision, regardless of the company's history or pedigree. Here are a couple of interesting examples (from my Strategy Development class) of major companies that changed their core vision over time:

1a. Boeing (1950): Become the dominant player in the commercial aircraft and bring the world into the jet age.

1b. Boeing (current): People working together as one global enterprise for aerospace leadership.

2a. Ford (early 1900s): Democratize automobile.

2b. Ford (current): Become the world's leading consumer company for automotive products and services.

Similarly, my venture's focus has changed since the beginning of the semester (i.e. from liquid smoothies to smoothie powder). From the feasibility presentation, it also seems like the other ventures have changed from their original ideas. That's OK. I can't wait to see what everyone eventually presents at the final presentation.

Reevaluating capacity building during a recessionary hangover

McKinsey’s study on capacity building efforts was insightful but may need some updating to remain timely. The venture philanthropists and foundations that financially supported non-profits favored organizational capacity investment when the study was conducted in 2001. There was certainly a need for a collated and codified concept of what organizational capacity encompasses and what means organizations can undertake to develop it.  McKinsey suggests resetting aspirations and strategy, focusing on strong managerial leadership, and remaining patient through the process. Of the three principal lessons presented I found the first resonated the most with me. Today, is there favorable sentiment toward a framework of infinite capacity investment and perpetually changing organizational focus? The other two primary takeaways translate better over ten years later with qualifications on the first statement.

Granted, in 2001 the investment world was recovering from the dot com burst and 9/11, but on the whole there was optimism. I feel that in the wake of the recession there is a sobering attention being put on focusing, simplifying, and downsizing. The monotonic frame of mind that encouraged expansion and investment through the early 2000s has been tempered by a voice that argues for examining the status quo and downsizing.  In principal it is difficult to make an argument that it is undesirable to see social programs expand into fully functional institutions. However, I find the main principal behind this mind set running contrary to the first of McKinsey’s suggestions.

Is capacity building really synonymous with focusing the vision of the institution? Is maintenance of a functional status quo universally less desirable than continued growth and development even if said growth and development isn’t warranted and takes away from the focus of the organization itself?  Expanding the organizational capacity of the organization could muddle it with bureaucracy and mission creep. The first suggestion leaves an organization at risk in a somewhat “chicken or the egg” scenario. Is the organization increasing capacity to meet demonstrated needs among constituents (desirable) or changing focus to accommodate newly developed capacity (undesirable)? As non-profit institutions are seldom flush with cash and human resources the troubles that come with expanding organizational capacity (collateral demands from other areas increase, other unintended consequences) can be particularly taxing. By allowing room for institutions to focus less on expanding their capacity and more upon making better use of what’s in place and doing more of what’s working strong management and patience will likely produce a more meaningful reward.

"Failure" for social entrepreneurs

Last week, Emily and Cynthia reflected on the meaning of failure in business and community organizations. We were subsequently privileged to learn from Paul van der Boor about e-Luma's behind-the-scenes struggles. Now, after reading about bootstrapping, discovery-driven planning, and starting small with pilot tests and exit strategies, I was hard-pressed not to investigate the topic of failure myself, and found a blog post by Paula Goldman specifically relevant to failure in social entrepreneurship.

Goldman's post notes that social entrepreneurs are especially bothered by failure. No surprise there. Nobody likes to go down in flames, but watching your dream die with you? Now, that really hurts. Goldman advocates for a larger body of research on the failure of social ventures, as well as more open sharing about failure by social entrepreneurs. She says this may allow us to extract lessons and historical insights. We can thereby learn about failure's positive effects on entrepreneurs, their fields and the other/future players in them, which Emily alluded to in her blog post last week.

I would argue that when it comes to social ventures, we need to avoid equating failure with its definition for standard business ventures. For the latter, staying in business equals success. But for social ventures, I believe it is enough simply to test a theory of what the world could be. If you believe in the potential for your venture to change the world, then whether or not it actually does, you succeed simply by putting it out there and finding out whether it sticks.

Guy Kawasaki's blog post Art of Bootstrapping recommends "Ship, then test," and while I would usually raise an eyebrow at such advice, I have to agree insofar as getting feedback is already one form of success. I would even take Kawasaki's advice one step further in light of social entrepreneurship--shipping is testing. Because as much as you believe you are experimenting with a social venture, you are at the same time testing and teaching yourself.

Coming back to Goldman, every kind of experience is a good experience when you learn from it. So thank you to Paul van der Boor, and thank you to all of you who teach the rest of us from your mistakes along the way.

Creating a Cohesive Team via Intrinsic Motivation

As has been mentioned already in class and in blog posts, building a good team is in large part dependent on figuring out the venture's needs and attracting members with desirable and complimentary skills according to those needs. Another important element in the internal cohesion of teams is having the right incentive structures.

Incentives don't just mean salaries and bonuses. In fact, people are generally more driven by higher level, intangible, intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation depends entirely on the work itself  rather than extrinsic rewards and punishment. It is generally linked to the ability to work autonomously, the ability to truly master something, and the feeling of contributing to something much bigger than your specific tasks.

Some companies have figured out how to intrinsically motivate their employees more than others. Google, for example, offers employees the benefit of spending 20% of their time (or one day per work week) to work on their pet projects. Other strategies and tactics include making employees owners of the company (literally and figuratively) and investing in the professional development of employees.

I know it seems these are all things for future consideration, but I think it is important that these elements be integrated in both the values of the venture and in the team building process. Instead of just thinking about one's own venture needs in terms of employees, also ask what candidates' goals are (both professional and non-professional) and think about how the enterprise can help team members fulfill these goals.It seems a worthwhile step given the importance of team cohesion and quality in the venture's short and long term success.

For more reading on and examples of intrinsic motivation, check out these articles:
http://trynice.com/resources/the-power-of-intrinsic-motivation/
http://www.managementexchange.com/blog/moonshot/it-doesnt-feel-work-power-intrinsic-motivation

How to gain insight on what makes people tick, before you pick your team

I am sure we all have had several experiences of working in a team, some great and some, well, so bad that you probably do not want to even remember. Sometimes it was others that really could not sync with the rest of the group, but sometimes it was us that probably did not have buy-in on the project/idea/homework, etc. Whichever way the final result went, it was extremely difficult to have insight about people's interest and passion from the get-go. So then, how do we actually go about picking team members?

I came across this article on Inc magazine, called "4 Traits of Dream Start-up Talent", and while these guys talk specifically about how to recruit new talent, it might be a good tool to conduct a preliminary evaluation of a team. Not only do they tell you what characteristics might work, but they also tell you how to test for these characteristics, which I thought was really fascinating. So here are the key points:

1. Adaptability: Every new start-up requires its team to be flexible and adaptable to new situations, on the go, but how do you test this? According to Seth Priebatsch of SCVNGR and LevelUp, candidates who know exactly where they want to be in five years are not flexible enough for the start-up world, because, lets face it, if you are on a mission towards some goal, you are not going to accept the constantly evolution and dynamism that is expected in a start-up.

2. Honesty: Honesty keeps people efficient, in that, you are always aware of your capabilities and changing circumstances. How do they test this? Simple, ask people if they are nervous when interviewing them for the team position. If they are not forthright in their response (but they are sweating, shaking or breaking out), you know it is a red flag.

3. Confidence: Confidence is key, how many times have you heard this. But, how can you easily test it? By challenging the person, and seeing whether they have the confidence to respond to your challenge without stressing out, or agreeing with your viewpoint too easily. If a person cannot defined their position on a particular issue, just because you do not agree with it, then they lack the confidence that is required to defend your mission.

4. Enthusiasm: Obviously, your team needs to be really excited about the idea, and one way to test this is asking why people are interested in working with you? And do not let them get away with some superficial reason that they probably read in some magazine, but something that demonstrates their passion for the mission.

Overall, this article gave me some really good ideas and questions I could ask people who are currently interested in joining my project but I cannot gauge whether they are really passionate about it. What do you think? Do you have other any insights?

Elevator Pitch

As Confluence approaches I have begun preparing to "elevator pitch" myself for a career position to as many companies as possible. I have spent tons of time preparing my portfolio and resume but doubt that I will have very much time at all for presentation. I have debated the different mediums to present myself; ie digital or print. I figure print can be left with those interested but may not be as prompt to go through as digital. Practicing elevator pitches in class has really come in handy here. Practicing speed and refinement has really help me determine what information is really key and what order in which to deliver it. I previously was delivering information in chronological order rather than enticing individuals at the very start of the interview. I plan on continuing applying these methodologies learned in class, practicing tons for confluence, and getting a job! Wish me luck!

Nate

Timing Is Everything

I came across an interesting article regarding the link between success and performance persistence. Performance persistence is the concept that successful entrepreneurs are more skilled than others. Furthermore, research shows that entrepreneurs who have previously succeeded will have roughly a 30% chance of succeeding in their next venture, which compares favorably to an 18% success rate for first time entrepreneurs. But is the reason for this success based on managerial skill or something else?

The argument made here is that market timing can represent a huge component of successful ventures. Not to discount the importance of managerial skill, but one could argue that choosing the right time to launch a venture is a skill in its own right. In most cases, those who display strong market timing are likely to outperform their industry peers.

Even if one has a strong concept and management team, he or she can fall victim to market forces outside of his or her control. Identifying the right time to act upon an idea will surely increase performance. We have previously witnessed innovative venture concepts fail due to poor market timing. This can often be the case for tech ventures, in which the market is not mature enough to accept a particular product. We need to be sure to accurately identify the market potential for our new ventures, which should also take into account the willingness of consumers to accept the innovation.

It can sometimes be better to wait. For example, would the iPhone have been as successful if it were launched 10 years ago? Probably not. It would have opened new doors in terms of innovation, but high production costs and low consumer demand would not have correlated into profits. For my venture, I have already recognized that I will need to wait a few years. I simply do not have enough credibility to launch my venture at this point in time, in which case waiting will greatly increase my chances. I am not trying to deter others from acting now, just highlighting the importance of recognizing market timing.

Please see the below article link:

http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/09-028.pdf

Noticing past failures

While employed at a previous job I was excited about new opportunities in providing community services, a collaboration project among community organizations.  However as time wore on it began to be apparent that the leadership in the different organizations were doing things that were far from who they had become.  They were selling out in search of funding lines.  In hindsight it appears that many if not most of the organizations had no defined core value or philosophy other than providing services.  A few of the organizations pulled out of the collaboration.  As I think about it now, the ones who did pull out did so possibly in order to not have to compromise on their core values.  Additionally, in my work experiences, I've noticed that a lot of organizations struggle but surround themselves with friends and people who don't really add different value.  Passion is fine and notable, but we need to push ourselves with those other areas, tech, financial, management.

Can failure also be a success?

On a long drive back to Pittsburgh with some friends, we began discussing the overarching issues of failure and success. More specifically we talked about at what point should one stop being idealistic about something such as a job or a start up company. When should a person actually admit failure and move on?

Being of the more realistic (and thus perhaps less hopeful) mindset, I quickly argued with my friends that people should be honest with themselves and understand that when something they are attempting to do is failing they should know it is better and safer to throw in the towel and quit. To get out before getting any deeper or spending any more money. However, a few of my fellow car riders went the opposite direction claiming that without failing or trying to push through failure new innovations would not be discovered, great leaps forward would never happen.

Our car debate ended with no firm conclusion; however, I continued thinking about it and upon returning home hopped on Google to search for some answers. Especially in light of this class and our attempts to start successful social ventures, I wanted to see what other people thought about success and failure, as well as find some solace that even if our venture failed that perhaps the attempt to bring it would life could yield smaller successes or other innovations.

After perusing a few articles I found the below article entitled "How Failure Breeds Success." It gave multiple examples of how companies and organizations must take risks and undergo failure to achieve real worthwhile successes. In one of the concluding sections (Find Your Own Flaws) which I found most interesting, the author describes that people tend to seek positive outcomes to prove that their idea was worthwhile or correct. However, instead what people should really be doing is trying to prove themselves wrong since focusing on "potential flaws makes failures, and the lessons that come with it, happen earlier." Thus by taking a chance, failing, and learning from it, people and companies can take huge steps forward and make groundbreaking innovations.

Although even after reading this article, I would not say I am a firm believer in failure bringing about success, I can more clearly understand how important the balance is between being realistic about failures and taking chances. Without putting myself or my venture in a vulnerable place, I might never have the opportunity to really take the next step to starting a successful organization. Besides isn't entrepreneurial spirit something we want to impart on the students involved in Brainwave?

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_28/b3992001.htm

Follow-up on turning the pursuit of knowledge into massive, crowd-sourced, online communities

In my presentation last week, I mentioned a CMU computer science professor named Adrien Treuille who presented at SXSW Interactive. He gave a great summary of the benefits of and opportunities within crowd-sourcing scientific pursuits, specifically with his online games FoldIt and EteRNA (300,000 players "incidentally" improving genetic algorithms). As my venture's goal is to crowd-source project ideas with gamification elements, I took the opportunity to capture his key points and to paraphrase his rationale for them.

Others of you might also be interested in similar pursuits, whether in this class or others, so I thought presenting Mr. Treuille's points here might be useful and inspirational to you:

1. "Games make us understand."
   To get people playing games that are also knowledge tools, it's important to help people understand what the science they are playing with actually feels like. Treuille's team also created expert versions of game software for professionals: for example, a pharmaceutical company uses a version to help people who order RNA's from them understand what it is they're ordering. There is something powerful here at the intersection of interactive techniques and hard scientific disciplines: "Call it Interactive Biology." Training, education, and professional perspectives all benefit.
2. "Humans can solve hard problems."
   Humans can do complicated things and see patterns that computers can't. Humans consistently solve protein puzzles that computers don't understand.
3. "Creating crowdsourced science games is a rush!"
   It is "awesome" to see hundreds of thousands of people responding to your games.
4. "Human learning takes place."
   Iterative design occurs when people experiment. Through this process, human players begin to dominate computer players. Again, people see patterns and learn from them.
5. "Humans naturally create knowledge."
   Humans are simply and inherently fascinated.
6. "We are creating new scientists."
   Reward players for writing plain English strategies. What are you doing when looking for new molecules? What's important and what's not? Players post strategies and then the best of these get folded into an Eterna Ensemble Strategy which will be used to improve science. For example, a completely unknown predictor of molecule stability was discovered by a librarian from Ohio. In a group chat, players asked for the experimental protocols necessary to synthesize molecules in their homes (informally called "Backyard Biosynth") because the game's makers weren't synthesizing molecules fast enough to satisfy players' gaming desires.
7. "People can break rules. Computers can't."
   "Players, build challenges for one another." Players created thousands of player-puzzles, like "RNA Alphabet." Treuille's team realized, "Wow, this is a scientific problem in its own right." They had computers compete against humans to solve these puzzles, with players searching for errors in computer solutions. When they find errors, Treuille's team is able to program new algorithms to prevent those problems from happening again. "Crowd-sourcing," Treuille asks? "No. CROWD-SOLVING."
8. "There are a lot of humans."
9. "Humans work for free."
   "Give them a score! That's all it takes," if the game is at all fun. Pure competition will lure players in, says Treuille. "Don't just give them points. Give them LOTS of points." "These games work because we imbued them with science. At first, we tried to take the sciencey parts out. But nobody cared. These fields have a real romance to them. The more science we imbed in these games, the more people wanted to play. In so many ways, these games are deeply, deeply imbued with science. We subtly remind people of the context of science problems, like a blue background with bubbles to remind players that the game is being played in a watery environment."
10. "Crowdsourcing science means a lot to players."

For more, I found a video of Treuille's presentation here:

http://www.crowdsourcing.org/video/adrien-treuille-crowdsourcing-science-/8454

Amazing stuff! And some great insights into how to build a user community around knowledge aggregation.

Six Traits of a Great Leader

"The best entrepreneurs are passionate, innovative, demanding and caring. "

A recent article on inc.com talked six traits of a good leader. They were

1. They surround themselves with smart people. 

2. They demand accountability. 

3. They understand the power of thank you. 

4. They truly inspire others. 

5. They are engaged in their surroundings. 

6. They seek out positive energy.

What i can really appreciate about this article is how easy many of these traits are to implement. While on the surface many of these traits may seem fluffy and lack substance. If you read the article in depth you really get a good understanding of the difference you can make as a leader just by adopting some of these traits. 


Number five was trait that I initially thought was a little fluffy. I mean how can you really measure the impact you are making on an organization by being "engaged." The term can be so broad and applied in so many different contexts how can it truly be measured.  Although the article gave a good example of this trait in context talking about leader engaging with staff in meetings, making sure they are getting different perspectives from different people. "They are present and engaged--no mobile phones in hand during a conversation."


I also feel these traits will aid in the growth and sustainability of a startup. If your staff is happy and "smart", your start-up will thrive. Seeking out positive energy, saying thank you and inspiring those around you are all traits that can be interlinked and can create powerful relationships. These types of relationships can foster trust and loyalty which are important traits to have in a startup environment. 


Link to the article can be found here: http://www.inc.com/damian-bazadona/great-leaders-essential-traits.html

Entrepreneurship Across Borders

          In the CBS article "Launching a Risky Project? Learn from Entrepreneurs in Africa" Kimberly Weisul summates insights from two stapes of the Wharton School of Business that draw connections between the challenges of business climates across markets. Namely, from U.S. business enterprise to African entrepreneurial ventures. The seven principle takeaways James Thompson and Ian MacMillan put forward are certainly valuable compliments to any number of insights to be found in the Management and Business aisles of your local Barnes and Noble. That being said, as much as we intrinsically search for means to simplify our ventures and make the road ahead more predictable by transplanting the ideas and experiences of others onto our own ventures I feel that we run the risk of drawing conclusions from non causally associated observations. Furthermore, such quick and easy suggestions for entrepreneurial literacy understate the importance of intrinsic skill, market placement and demand for the product, etc.
          Full disclosure, I am writing this after only reading the CBS article. I have not read Thompson or MacMillon's full explorations of these issues but can't help but feel these seven key takeaways oscillate between being blatantly obvious to being wild oversimplifications that sound about right but after a moment of reflection leave a lot of room for question (like many management and entrepreneurship "ten best, five key, my greatest insights etc.")
          For example: "Decide what level of success counts as success or failure." Is it not completely obvious that one must establish metrics for success? Wouldn't any reasonable entrepreneur have notions on what would ultimately merit the success of their venture merely from deciding to undertake the venture? Even a completely nonsensical idea destined for commercial failure (rocket powered kitten mittens) would come almost inseparably bundled to a metric of success (selling some number of rocket powered kitten mittens at a profit to cover operating and manufacturing costs). On the other hand are the head-nod triggering simple statements that do wild injustice to the actual nature of the issue at hand. "Preplan a realistic exit strategy", for example. That sounds perfectly reasonable. Until you begin to mull over the literally countless confounding variables and uncertainties littered across the landscape of your venture in its early stages. Perhaps some start ups have contractually binding agreements in place that guarantee their operating position in the near future, but what of the many more startups which have almost no way of knowing what lies ahead and how or if they will be able to abandon ship if the time came? By consuming these deceivingly simple anecdotes entrepreneurs could be fooled into underestimating challenges or, worse off, waste significant time trying to pair their specific scope to these sweeping, nondescript metrics. An entrepreneur must be focused, learn by doing, and never underestimate the challenges ahead.
          I don't mean any disrespect; these are two very honorable members of the Wharton community. My principle objection to the way the article is presented is that these insights substantiate the assertion that corporate managers at Goldman Sachs have a lot to learn from a small business owner in any of the over fifty countries of Africa. I'm not saying there are not things to be learned from and between the two groups. But there are infinite contextual factors that would need to be discussed to clarify what these lessons are and how to make these lessons meaningful and tailored. It cannot simply be prescribed in seven easily digestible tidbits.

Non-Technical CEOs in an IT-Startup

I've been interested in pursuing an IT start-up venture in the last couple of years. However, one thing has always held me back: the lack of technical (i.e. programming) skills. Many of the successful IT companies, including Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, and Dropbox, were started by technical-minded individuals. This raises the question: where do non-technical entrepreneurs fit in this growing IT space?

As a Health Care Policy and Management student, I have very limited programming skills. Instead, my strengths are in communications, building relationships, and team management. But are those desirable or critical qualities for a CEO in an IT start-up? One can have great ideas and motivation, but without a solid prototype or tangible product, you might as well call it quits. 

Non-technical entrepreneurs who want to pursue an IT start up must find a suitable technical partner. No ifs or buts. You, as the non-technical entrepreneur, may have the contextual knowledge and amazing ideas, but you still need someone who understands the technology. Let's say I want to start a health IT company. How do I, a policy and management student, leverage my education to lead a group of savvy programmers? What are some of the things I can do to prevent the programmers from standing up and saying "Why do I need you when I am the one developing the money-making product?"

This blog has some good insights: Startup Guide for Non-Coders

Venture team building

While delving deeper trying to understand how to define roles, identify suitable talent and nurture/motivate teams for specific organizational tasks, I came across this slide set. It helped me clarify my concepts of  leader vs manager, who is a 'customer', and the many hats that entrepreneurs have to wear to achieve their goals and targets to achieve their mission. It contains some cartoons at the end that lightened the length!

http://www.slideshare.net/groyce/The-new-venture-team-M3

Hope you find them useful. The essence that I extracted from our assigned reading and the slide set -  learn everything you can about people (customer), people (employee/team, staff), people (partner, investor, grantor,advisor). Set a personal example of integrity and authenticity ( demonstrate consistency in personal values) to actively  lead AND manage them in your organization while meeting the planned targets. Ensure healthy and desirable differences in skill sets without compromising values,  to avoid 'birds of a feather getting lost together'. The skill (and challenge) lies in execution of the plan, so be nimble, flexible and adaptable too.

Traditional Business Models and Social Innovation

Divisive Visions and Social Entrepreneurship

          In any entrepreneurial endeavor there is the eventual risk that founders will come to a disagreement over the execution of their creative vision. Regardless of the nature of the organization there will inevitably be disagreements over any number of elements of the organization. This is true of both non profits and and social enterprises. In the case of social enterprise, however, there is a unique challenge over disagreements. In a for profit enterprise, in spite of any number of other complications that may arise, the principal concern is making money. If the company isn't making money, it is failing. In social enterprise the primary goal at hand is achieving a mission that transcends money making and addresses a social need. What happens, then, when a social venture teeters on the verge of the two worlds and the two founders find their highly different approaches to operating the company are in line with the mission of the organization?
          Two friends of mine are the founders of an apparel screen printing company. Roughly $50,000 have been put into the twenty-somethings' business between the two of them. The concept is that local artists sign with their company to have their work incorporated into apparel. The artist has no discretion in what specifically the work is screen printed onto (t-shirt, v-neck, long sleeve, etc.) not how the work is screen printed (colors, orientation, size). Different prints cost the company different amounts to create depending on the materials used and labor involved. This issue at hand is about what their ultimate goal is: to make the most amount of money or to create a product that best represents the artists work even if the margin of profit is smaller. In other words, if a piece can be printed onto the least expensive clothing item, making very few alterations to the equipment involved, and using basic colors it costs the company much less money. Making alterations to the printing equipment, using more expensive apparel, and using more elaborate color combinations cost the company significantly more. The problem is, the apparel all sells for the same flat rate.
          One of them sees pursuing profits as perfectly ethical and in line with the mission. If the company doesn't make money it goes under and they lose their investment. The artists don't explicitly demand (contractually) their work is portrayed a certain way or on a certain material. It's up to the company to make those choices. The other principal sees it as the company's intrinsic duty to bring up and coming and otherwise unheard of artists' work to the fashion world at whatever cost it takes. They cannot be motivated by profit margins because if artists feel alienated or let down by lackluster translations of their work they will stop signing with the company. Ultimately, a balance must be struck between financial viability and the artistic mission. However, I find it interesting that an organization can be so intwined in the balance between social and for profit motives.

Nice presentations everyone, I'm soliciting feedback

Hi all,
Congratulations to all on your presentations. In only seven weeks, all the plans have taken shape and moved a lot further from our initial one minute 'elevator pitch'. I really enjoyed hearing all of you and learning from your presentation styles and techniques.

I'd love to get feed back on my project from each and every one of you. Please jot down whatever strikes you - pros and cons related to project, presentation, slides, emphasis on some aspect you think is missing - all comments welcome. Please e-mail me at sangeeta.chakravorty@gmail.com separately,

Thanks again,

Obtaining Capital

Seed capital has been a large concern during our time planning the launch of BrainWave. We have many ideas for obtaining capital but it remains an issue simply because of the steep expense involved in obtaining tooling, employing professional specialists, and launching a marine craft manufacturing plant. Marine manufacturing is already extremely capital intensive let alone the involvement and education of underprivileged teens.

In exploring ideas for cutting launch costs or obtaining seed capital we have identified a few concepts that seem to be most realistic and promising. Some of those ideas include partnerships with high quality parts providers and other marine manufacturers,  sponsorships and partnerships with high power marine sports teams, pre order fees and payment plans, government funding both on a federal and state level, and developing early relationships with dealers and purchasers to fund the first boats.

Bellow are a few links that I have found in exploring avenues to obtain seed capital:
Inc. How to Raise Start Up Capital
Entrepreneur 3 Ways To Raise Seed Capital
Business Week Raising Seed Capital Now

Nate

Perhaps the hardest part of forming a successful social venture: building the right team

A social venture thrives off the excitement of the people who dedicate their skills and experience to it. The success is hinged on the genuine passion at play.

While I agree with the five characteristics of a powerful team as highlighted in our lecture notes, I find this week's topic to be a challenging one because it's not only about building the right team but also how to maintain healthy team dynamics. To add to the "five characteristics of a powerful team" as highlighted in our lecture notes, I would add: The willingness of teammates to consistently accept and act on feedback.

In "How to Pick the Right Startup Team" Forbes Magazine highlights that there should be no egos and that "entrepreneurship is about adaptation." The attitude matters a lot, but this topic is challenging particularly because there can be a tradeoff between the characteristics i.e. choosing someone with a complementary skill set but not the right attitude. It's important to have people of varying levels of experience on the team, and certainly people that can think of adaptation as an asset.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/theyec/2011/11/23/how-to-pick-the-right-startup-team/2/

Building under high uncertainty

I really appreciated the readings on building a strong vision and discovery driven planning within a context of high uncertainty. The two compliment each other nicely and seem especially relevant to my DiasporaConnect idea.

On the one hand, I have a clear mission of social investment and making remittances easier and less expensive that will not change. But the competitive landscape within which all of this is supposed to function has been traditionally monopolized and is currently pretty volatile due to the breakthroughs in mobile money transfers. Building a vision, based on a core ideology of social good and an envisioned future where mobile money transfers dominate and DC owns a chunk of the market (which is no longer dominated by corporate giants like Western Union), will be key to forging ahead.

On the other hand, global money transfer is a market with an extremely high assumptions-to-knowledge ratio. My earlier suspicions of this were confirmed when doing the research for the feasibility plan. There is some data on Foreign-born populations in the U.S., some information on remittance inflows into Africa, and bits and pieces on the relative market shares of various types of money transfers. But there is not coherent source of data linking these three points together as the importance of remittances is just now being fully appreciated. The lack of concrete data means that everything from revenue structure to projected budgets must be based on estimations and assumptions, which, as the second article points out, can be dangerous when projections and results are expected to be closely aligned.

The discovery-based planning framework provides a nice guide to framing, figuring out the realistic competitive benchmarks that one should adhere to and differentiate from, specifying deliverables, testing assumptions, managing milestones, and minimizing risky investments within this high uncertainty context. I see this as the next phase beyond the basic feasibility plans developed, which, I know in my case, is riddled with unknowns and assumptions.

To put these two tools, the vision and the discovery-driven planning, into a corny, but hopefully practical analogy: the vision is like the north star or lighthouse or setting sun providing a natural compass and the discovery-driven planning is like the map, providing various flexible routes to reach one's destination. It would be interesting to read a case study involving both of these concepts.

Although these concepts are not explicitly outlined here, this is a case that I think offers a nice illustration of both a strong vision and discovery-driven planning at work:
http://www.africanleadershipacademy.org/sites/default/files/sites/default/files/inline-image-uploads/Case_E01_Wanja_Michuki_Highland_Tea.pdf

The publisher, The African Leadership Academy, is also a great social enterprise, worthwhile checking out: http://www.africanleadershipacademy.org/

As I think about why I want to do my particular venture, I keep stumbling over the concept of profits. It doesn't become a business venture unless there are profits.  Otherwise it remains a social or community service. Or a failed concept.  I want to make sure that I stay true to myself.

In preparation for the initial presentation, I watched ABC's Shark Tank. What struck me most was that successful pitches were delivered with certainty not arrogance.  This is a long road with challenges unanticipated.  Is this simply class or is it something I can figure out how to do? 

Kickstarter

Over break I spent a good bit of my time helping my friends in LA with their start-up t-shirt/art company. One of their main tasks during my visit was planning an event to coincide with the launch of their Kickstarter. At the time I knew very little about Kickstarter or how it works; however, upon learning more I thought it was something important and useful to share with our class especially as many of us move into the funding stages of our ventures.

Kickstarter ( found at http://www.kickstarter.com ) is the largest funding platform for creative projects. Kickstarter works by allowing start-ups in various fields and genres to set a funding goal before the beginning of their event. Then by getting the word out their to various people and organizations, they nudge people in pledging money towards their overall funding goal. Only if the funding goal is reached in the amount of time allocated for the campaign, do the companies actually get to retain the money pledged. Generally, investors receive some sort of thank you gift for their pledge which is typically related to the project itself. If the funding goal is not reached then investors keep the money they pledged.

Kickstarter offers start-ups the chance to test their ideas in a risk free manner and oftentimes will even provide the initial capital to launch their project. Kickstarter is definitely a tool many of us could use later to help gather initial funds for our project.

Also, if any of you would like to learn more about my friends start-up, you can find information at http://www.sicapparel.com. Their kickstarter launch takes place this upcoming Sunday, March 25th. Please let me know if you would like more information!

Unveiling the beauty of statistics

Last week, as I was working and re-working through the logistics of my feasibility plan, I took a break and came across this amazing TED talk by Hans Rosling | http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html

I was completely mesmerized by his amazing skills of combining data with design, and felt that everyone should spend the 20 odd minutes viewing this presentation. But it was not just the fancy demonstration of statistics that makes this talk great, it is the content that is delivered. Dr. Rosling is able to walk us through the unbelievable changes in global trends specifically in economies of various countries and their health using the power of freely available data.

As we all work on our ideas to change the world, good data plays an ever important role in understanding the various aspects of local or global trends and it becomes ever so trying to sift through all the junk that is cluttered across the various websites in cyberspace. We have already discussed how several "legit" data sources such as the World Bank, the UN, the World Health Organization, etc can not only have a variety of differences in their researched numbers, but also be extremely difficult to interpret. So, then, what Dr. Rosling is trying to attempt, i.e., create a search engine that can efficiently sift through all these institutions but also envelop it with a simple software platform that can depict these data in a coherent and logical manner.

However, obviously, statistics is not simple, and as some people critiqued, cannot be and should not be simplified. Personally, I do not entirely agree with that viewpoint. For me, depiction of data that is able to move me (and like Dr.Rosling mentioned, the statistical differences in depiction of data in this manner are much smaller compared to the differences presented by the data) and forces me to question my presumptions is definitely more interesting, than just trying to read through raw tables that might make no sense whatsoever.

And so I leave the judgment on whether this is an accurate representation of world facts to each of you, individually. However, some of the key things I took away from his talk, and he has given quite a few at several TED events, are:

1. The current economic state of affairs across the world is completely different from what it was a few years ago, and hence before categorizing countries as developed and developing, it is important to really understand what the round reality might be.
2. Countries in a continent like Africa have populations that lie on a wide diaspora of social, economic and health spectrum, so using the same set of starting parameters when designing a product idea for Ghana would not work for Sierra Leone.
3. And finally, to put into Dr. Rosling's words, "... Swedish top students know statistically significantly less about the world than the chimpanzees.”

PS: The software that is demonstrated in the talk can be found at http://www.gapminder.org/

Pricing Strategies (continued)

I'd like to expand upon Tony's post on pricing by offering a metric one can use to help determine price. Price elasticity measures the % change in quantity divided by the % change in price. If one is able to produce a product that has a relatively inelastic demand, then customers will consume the product at the same rate despite an increase in price.

We should keep price elasticity in mind when analyzing the potential profits, consumption and sustainability of our ventures. If we produce a product that has lots of substitutes, then it will be more elastic. This could eventually lead to the downfall of one's venture. In this case, increasing the price will drive down consumption at a higher rate. Efficient markets dictate that competitors will decrease price in order to increase short-term quantity (for example, decrease price by 5% to increase quantity by 10%). This will then force one to respond by also lowering price, ultimately reducing industry-wide profits. This will destroy bottom-line profits for your specific product and reduce financial sustainability of the overall venture.

By promoting an inelastic product, consumers will be less price sensitive as they will be willing to consume the good regardless of a change in price. For instance, gasoline is an inelastic good as a spike in price would not reduce demand in the short-term. An inelastic venture conveys uniqueness, as consumers cannot seek a viable alternative as a replacement. When determining the financial feasibility and the overall pricing scheme of our ventures, it will be important to forecast the demand/price elasticity of our products.

Here is a somewhat older article that helps illustrate this point from an entrepreneurial standpoint:

http://www.businesspundit.com/elasticity-for-entrepreneurs/ 

Pricing Strategies

Pricing. Easy enough right? Price your product or service at a level where you stand to make a profit once you've taken total costs away from total revenues. Simple as it may seem, pricing is such a crucial factor in determining a company's viability. If you price too low, then you will leave money on the table that could have contributed to the growth of your company. If you price too high, then you stand to lose existing and potential customers as they settle for a suitable substitute.

The following article "Why Everyone Lies About Pricing" is an interesting article related to pricing. It speaks from personal experience, articulating lessons learned from poor pricing management. The key takeaway from this article: in order to really understand pricing, one needs to understand both the inside and outside realities of pricing. The inside reality of pricing is your typical cost structure, its variation, and the long-term implications. The outside reality of pricing is your customer's valuation of your product or service and their willingness to pay for it. However, the difficulty with the outside reality is that not everyone will be honest. The only truth we really know: customers will want to pay as little as possible.

What are your pricing strategies? How do you really understand your customer's willingness to pay?

Link: http://www.inc.com/rory-odriscoll/why-everyone-lies-about-pricing.html

Knowing WHY You Are Pursuing Your Venture

Building brand identity is a tough and never-ending process. In the process of creating a business plan, I feel like we often lose our purpose; instead, we focus on the product or service, the financials, etc. When I was developing my feasibility plan, I found myself enamored with my venture's feasibility (i.e. profits) and lost sight of why I was doing it.

It is important to constantly reflect on why you are doing what it is you're doing. It is source of excitement, that reinvigorates your relentless pursuit for success. Further, understanding why you are pursuing your venture dictates your brand identity-how you want your product or service to be perceived when you're not around (Michael Dell). A strong understanding of why your company exist will make it easier to shape your brand identity and ultimately the success of your venture.

Here is an article that elaborates on the importance of articulating your company's existence.

http://www.inc.com/tom-searcy/great-companies-start-with-why.html

More 'light' for social innovative student ventures

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120207-lantern-shines-light-on-disasters
Here's another inspiring venture conceived by two students. Global implications, high utility serving community needs in diverse settings, low cost, creating markets, pricing, placement and product design - just the stuff we are learning to do in class.

India Health

Tailoring specific solutions to meet perceived and expressed needs is the core tenet of entrepreneurship and innovation



http://www.k4health.org/system/files/K4Health%20India%20Report.pdf

Competition

The recent readings have mentioned differentiation and positioning quite a bit. In analyzing the possible positioning opportunities we are forced to first spend time further analyzing the market situation and identifying competitors. As Emily previously mentioned in her blog post last week, our venture, now known as BrainWave, will cater to multiple customers:

- High School Students in underprivileged or at risk areas of Dade County Miami Florida
- Individuals with expendable income looking for a luxury custom high-powered speed boat

Furthermore, considering the target consumers we have chosen are looking for vastly different experiences and deliverables, its crucial that we identify a positioning gap that will appeal and sustain differentiation in both markets.

Competition in recruiting high schools students might be local and high school sports teams, local and high school clubs and after school programs, and other social ventures that work with teens such as minddrive, but considering BrainWaves unique offering there is nothing quite like it, anywhere.  Competition in the sales of high luxury boats seems to be a bit more cut throat. Competition consists of hundreds of other boat builders, boat dealers, and other aquatic sports equipment sales such as wave runners or jet skis, but BrainWaves main competitive advantages will be in depth customer/designer relationships to develop truly custom products, and the involvement of underprivileged or at risk high school students during build time.

Nate

Brand Identity- Starbucks

Amy's post on the importance of building a brand and staying true to it got me to think further about brand identity and how one can stay true to their initial mission in light of constant changing markets and economic conditions. Because of competition I think it is important to constantly innovate and remain ahead of the curve. But then the question remains how do you keep your brand identity strong if you continually need to adapt.

When struggling with this question, I remembered a recent television special on Starbucks discussing how Starbucks has had to adapt to changes in the market place to remain competitive yet has decided to use a type of "dual strategy" so it could retains its brand identity even while adapting its business strategy.

I was able to find an article (link below) that perfectly summarized the main issues from the television special. As the writer explains iconic brands, such as Starbucks, should "strategically manage the dual process of continuous innovation on the one hand and reinforce their guiding strategic brand." The article did an excellent job answering my original questions regarding how one should balance innovation and adaptation with maintaining the original goals and brand identity of the organization. Starbucks is a perfect example of this as they have remained a innovator and market leader while undergoing changes to their strategic business plan.

http://www.venturerepublic.com/resources/Starbucks_-_Challenges_to_iconic_brands.asp

Content Marketing

When it comes to an organization employing social media tactics to increase engagement and awareness around their organization, its really about an organization crafting a story. A story that conveys the organizations mission, message and vision. When done correctly this can have positive effects on the user experience, as supporters are interacting with the brand. Social Media seeks to take this story and convey it in a compelling way that will encourage supporters to engage more with the brand and engage more with each other, in turn, cultivating long term relationships with supporters and creating a community around that organization. 

This is not a concept that is a new, but it is a concept that that organizations are increasingly taking notice of, better known has content marketing. This article from Mashable give a pretty good overview of content marketing and 5 organizations that are doing it well. The outline 5 tips:

• Leverage video to tell your story
• Use a multidimensional approach
• Harness the power of user generated content
• Empowering staff to be creative 
• Stay true to your brand

I feel social media serves as a great platform to tell your story and spread it to a lot of people, quickly. It's also give you a first hand look of who your audience it, allowing you to tweak content appropriately. The article gives very good examples of large non profits that employ the tactics listed above. These are all tactics that when done well can make an impact on organizations as they leverage their voices to the masses.  

The link can be found here: http://mashable.com/2012/03/02/content-marketing-non-profits/