Showing posts with label systems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label systems. Show all posts

Thursday, 23 June 2016

Marjorie Kelly on the Emergent Ownership Revolution

Do you need something more tangible to use when talking about social business?
Is the 'social purpose' argument a bit thin for you?

According to Marjorie Kelly in Towards Mission-Controlled Corporations: Extractive vs Generative Design there are 5 elements of a generative ownership-driven design framework for social businesses:
  1. Membership – How can we have the right people forming part of the business? How can they contribute to the running of the business? What roles and authority can they have?
  2. Purpose – What purpose can a business have beyond profit-making for shareholders? What problems might it solve? How is 'wealth', and value spread within the local community?
  3. Governance – Who is the board? Who does the board answer to? 
  4. Finance – Where does the money come from? Where does it go? How does it circulate through the business? How does it generate wealth and value?
  5. Networks – How does the business get access to goods, services, information? How might the exchange be carried out? How might it be non-financial? How might it reach beyond typical boundaries e.g. geography?

Saturday, 2 April 2016

Will Starbucks food donations encourage local restaurants and shops to do the same?

Interesting question. Possibly. But as said below by a previous poster the value chain and business processes at large food restaurants look different from those at small restaurants and thus the opportunity for surplus (and thus donations) is different.
Let me add one thought that sprung to mind. In my experience, the other factor that affects the flow of surplus food to the people who need it are the intermediaries in between. For example, small restaurants are not normally able to afford to send/deliver/transport food to charities outside of a couple of miles and small charities are not normally able to absorb this cost either. One idea is that services spring up to help this process/fill a gap. Maybe a group of restaurants band together to hire a van or a group of charities do that ... or even a separate intermediary (maybe... a neighbourhood support scheme paid through by the local authority or even people/citizens/charitable folks who live in the area pay for it). Or possible, someone likes Uber or your local taxi cab company offers this service at a discounted fee.


So, we might see that maybe instead of giving money to charity, people give money in other ways to help restaurants get their food to people who need it.

Originally posted on Quora here

Friday, 1 April 2016

Has anyone applied systems thinking to international development?

The short answer is Yes!
The longer answer is that this area is still undergoing an attrition and evolution with people in the sector trying to shape what this means for them and their work. There is a real dearth of good M&E/impact evaluation support for systems thinkers in development, which makes the work harder. There are some organisations that addressing this issue head on and are moving away from M&E and towards more knowledge, learning and practice. To do this requires building the capacity within field teams, management, senior management and also, with donors.
For me, the most interesting thing is how systems thinking principles are used effectively. The aim should be to help developing countries determine what kind of system they want to have and what people will want to do in the system. A big danger to the space that in our attempts to 'bring about a better way of doing things', we determine what the system should look like *for* countries and we hard code these principles activities and behaviours *for* people. Moreover, integrative, participatory and democratic approaches for systems thinking are often just not enough because it can set up a situation where there is still a dominant thinking that others are being encouraged to conform to or align with.
In a nutshell, systems thinking for development cannot be the end-goal. It should be a starting point to think about doing development differently and better.

Originally published on Quora here

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

Sunday, 20 December 2015

Systems thinking skills

Source: Originally found here. Please read and study this concept mapView in a new windowwhich shows some common skills associated with systems thinking.

Saturday, 12 December 2015

How might a systems thinker talk about scaling in emerging markets?


  1. Immerse yourself in the chaos
  2. Understand the product
  3. Look at what is going on in the wider environment
  4. Set up some facts - what is the model, what is the impact
  5. Figure out what scale will look like
  6. Set some objectives
  7. Understand cost and value drivers
  8. Do market SWOT
  9. Set up expansion pathways
  10. Systematise basic processes
  11. Bring on actors
  12. Oversee replication scouting and testing mission
  13. Create and use feedback loop to improve systems
  14. Systematise complicated processes with expert help
  15. De-systemiatise processes, unbundle, de-mystify
  16. Set up network of actors and activities and functions
  17. Create learning buckets
  18. Push through learning through the network
  19. Oversee trickle through of information and action
  20. Do continuous learning and innovation
  21. Systematise
  22. De-systemiatise 
  23. Create networks
  24. Package learning 
  25. Distribute learning
  26. Oversee trickle through 
  27. Do continuous learning and innovation
  28. Systematise
  29. De-systemiatise 
  30. etc

Wednesday, 9 December 2015

What types of careers are there in international development?


Skills (What you can do!)
  • All skills needed!!
Functions (What role you would play!)
You may have 1 or more of these skills!
  • Fundraising - storytelling, strategy, communications, budgeting, networking, relationship building, research, project management
  • Policy - research, communications, legal, institutional development, relationship building, politics
  • Institutional development - research, governance, relationship building, politics
  • Economic development - economic modelling, industrial development, market systems strategy, welfare 
  • Social welfare - advocacy, social welfare subsidies, charity work, 
  • Private sector development - business innovation, enterprise development, enabling environment, entrepreneurship, taxation and legal
  • Marketing and retail - commerce, business management, sociology, psychology, policy and/or network development
  • Operations - logistics, network management, project management, finance, and/or results measurement 
  • HRM - sociology, psychology, training and development, and/or team building
  • Finance - finance, strategy, M&E, project management, and/or legal
  • Results measurement - finance, strategy, project management, and/or research

New Trends (Where you might position yourself!)
  • Market-based development
  • Socialist market systems
  • Social welfare
  • Ethical business
  • Fintech
  • Behaviourial sciences
  • Systems change
  • Resilience
  • Conflict 
  • Livestock
  • Healthcare
  • Climate and the natural environment
  • Informal sector
  • NGO organisational development
  • Foundation funding
Things to Remember!
  • Be different - If you have good ideas that seem too out-of-the-box for traditional work, this could be the right time to build a skills around it and offer that skill to the development space
  • Look deeper than large institutions - If you want to learn on the job, develop tangible skills and be part of an impactful project, start at the field and work upwards
  • Competences are important - teamwork, patience, time management, critical thinking, adaptability, focus and determination

Saturday, 5 December 2015

What does it mean to do ethical business in apparel?

What value do ethical standards bring to the fashion industry?
What does it mean to be ethical in fashion ?
What is the business case for ethical fashion?
  • Product development that sources and uses raw materials according to sustainability regulations/norms/codes/standards/values in the industry 
  • Product design that reflects stories from different people and different culture (i.e. non-normative, beyond the Western beauty ideal) and in a way that respects ownership and that protects against cultural appropriation for profit
  • Innovation based on participative collaboration that understands power structures and control/equality/equity issues 
  • Ensuring that wage payments, work health and safety conditions and regulations are observed, external audits and inspections are supported and violence and illegal practices are addressed through a fair justice system (Guardian)
  • Working with producers and suppliers in developing countries: meeting regulations and codes and respecting power imbalances in ethical management styles and monitoring systems
  • A systemic approach to certification/regulations/norms/codes/standards to bring about sustainability and scale and builds on the successes of supply chain strengthening (multi-stakeholder governance, transparency, independent verification, and third party chain of custody) (Business Fights Poverty)
  • Creating a demand for ethical fashion by using multi-channel retail opportunities including pop-ups to showcase the brand the product and the story
  • Ensuring that the pricing model allows producers and suppliers to be paid a living/decent wage even when it means charging the retailer or consumer a few pence more. The recent example of dairy farmers in the UK removing milk from supermarket shelves in an attempt to sell it directly to the consumer to get a better price.
  • Understanding that in fashion there is economic value to the 'story' in the same way that any brand builds equity - through rational, emotional and behaviourial consumer analysis
  • The impact on retail pricing - what is the market willing to pay?
  • Businesses that 'work in Africa' do not automatically mean social enterprise or ethical sourcing
  • Making your claims of ethical business practices credible and possible to observe and verify. Consumer driven - Mintel found that half of those surveyed said they would only pay more for ethical products if they understood clearly where the extra money went, and 52 per cent said they found information about which foods are ethical confusing (Supplymanagement.com)
  • Working on textile waste to minimise, recycle, reuse, upcycle, upgrade, re-configure, re-integrate, and more (The Ethical Fashion Source)



---
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/10/lithuanian-migrants-chicken-catchers-trafficked-uk-egg-farms-sue-worst-gangmaster-ever
http://source.ethicalfashionforum.com/article/recycling-on-the-high-street-3-different-approaches

A systems perspective to supply chain development

In classic economic theory, making products cheaper by reducing the cost of goods (COGS) can mean removing the intermediaries in the supply chain where margin might be absorbed. This means system actors, such as agents, middlemen/women, traders, small retailers (kiosks) are vulnerable to the disintermediation. However, in low-income countries, this has a system wide effect: this will limit the supply of goods and services to marginalized populations, such as smallholder farmers or the urban poor and this will reduce employment and revenue generation by cutting the poor out of the system. Moreover, in times of desperation, this will naturally create conflict and instability that will have even more far-reaching effects beyond the original supply chain.

Things to remember:
  • For real wide-scale change, take a step back and think more systemically and less narrowly and think about the wider impact of any intervention in business operations, pricing and COGS. 
  • Rather than a focus on cost, price and money, consider gains that bring about long-term growth, such as quality, value and service-driven loyalty
  • Yes, eliminating supply chain actors may reduce the cost of goods along the way, but there is no guarantee that this will be passed on to the customer.  
  • Intermediaries are the backbone of a system and agents, traders, kiosks are ever present in a market - work through them rather than against them or by sidelining them
  • Look at where the incentives lie. For a supplier, that wants to shed certain costs, who might be willing to take them on? Who might benefit? Who might see the value in managing this transaction directly? This is essentially the origination of outsourcing.
  • Consider how the market could function better. As a supplier, you may be incurring a huge cost getting products to the consumer. However, if a retailer can offer a better coordination function, then it would make more sense to switch to wholesale operations. Many retailers in developing countries do this albeit with  need for capacity building around effective management. 

New to international development - Where to look for job opportunities?

Books



Research/Think Tanks
Opportunities are for more seasoned development professionals with 5 years or so experience
CSR Networks
Opportunities are emerging - from communications to technical assistance on projects
Social Business
Opportunities are emerging - technical assistance, field work
Corporate Foundations
International Charities
  • International Red Cross
  • World Vision
  • Save the Children
  • Oxfam
Opportunities are communications, fundraising, project management, team coaching; may provide training to get you field-ready (smaller NGOs might be willing and able to send you directly to the field)

Development Consultancies
  • DAI
  • Adam Smith International
  • Cardno Emerging Markets
  • GIZ
  • ITAD
  • The Springfield Centre
Opportunities are in research, policy, monitoring and evaluation, project management; long term roles will get you field-ready on formal secondments or assignments, however, generally the roles are West-based

Practitioner Networks
Opportunities are for seasoned professionals with 5-8 years experience under their belt

Thursday, 12 November 2015

RCTs in poverty reduction and development: why are some practitioners abandoning RCTs?

This blogpost about ethics in international development is about a randomised control trial (RCT) in Kenya. In the experiment, some households in Kenya were given unconditional cash transfers of either USD 404 or USD 1525. The researchers found, unsurprisingly, that the lucky ones were happier and that their unlucky neighbours were unhappy. The paper is aptly titled “Your Gain is my Pain”.

Most importantly, however, the blogger reflects on why this type of research is done at all: "Am I the only one to think that is not ethical dishing out large sums of money in small communities and observing how jealous and unhappy this makes the unlucky members of these tight knit communities?" 

For myself, as a development practitioner with a systems thinking perspective, RCTs can come across as having very limited usefulness and application. They can also be quite machine-based: they either choose to wilfully ignore human behaviour or they simply limit their interactions with other disciplines (psychology, sociology, anthropology) so that they can create more simple hypotheses. Thus, it is felt that the applicability of an RCT for complex problems (such as systemic poverty) is limited.

The RCT we have seen from Kenya seems to fall into that trap too. This RCT seems to need to test the notion that poor people in Kenya might not exhibit the same reactions and behaviours as other people. As if the nature of the human condition (in Africa) is under exploration. To me, this is strange and feels like the original hypotheses might have been drastically distilled and reduced down to overly simplified thoughts.

I wonder how the findings would actually be useful to policy and projects. Who might need proofs from an RCT that Kenyans are like any other human being? How could such research be useful for development planning at an economic or social level? Why is the notion that proving that desperation, jealously and unhappiness occurs among very poor people is valuable? I would also wonder what long-lasting impact this type of research would have on social relationships in the communities in the future.

Globally, there is a large community of development practitioner who feel that RCTs in poverty interventions are not ethical and not useful. From my conversations with them, they make the following points:
  1. In many RCTs, an assumption is made that the the groups will not be communicating with each other. However, it is actually very difficult to have demarcated and clear boundaries for the treatment groups to be adequately isolated. People talk. Information can flow through multiple channels and through multiple mechanisms (face-to-face, mobile phone, internet, etc) across groups, geographies, social hierarchies, institutions, etc. 
  2. In RCTs, people might be very desperate because of the psychological and social impact of poverty and crisis. In this case all the RCT does is exacerbate that desperation and exacerbate those behaviours that present themselves when people are in desperate situations. The results are therefore naturally biased and skewed and outlying when compared to any group at any point in time. This is not adequately recognised in RCTs and thus not at all reflected when RCTs attempt to influence policy and project applications.
  3. Over time, the RCT can have a lasting negative impact. Those RCTs which test the type of reactions as the one featured here in Kenya - jealousy and unhappiness - can damage social relationships between individuals and groups even after the trial has ended. Real people are not as adept to switching off their pain and trauma (and any additional feelings of betrayal, anger, envy, frustration, etc.) as machines might be able to! 

Monday, 24 August 2015

What are some useful indicators of systemic change?

What is systemic change?
  1. A measurement  of the change in the rules that govern the system and that affect how actors/agents behave and function. From an economic perspective, this means going beyond the conception of people as 'rational individuals' and incorporating a better understanding of social constraints that lock us in to our patterns of consumption. 
  2. The relationship between certain types of 'resilience finance' and the ability to confront shocks and disasters at individual level, household level, business level, industry level and across social networks and political positions 
  3. A measurement of 'subjective resilience' at household level to better understand the ability to "anticipate, buffer and adapt to disturbance and change"
  4. Developed by looking at synergies between the development, business and economics fields of study to better frame measurements of systemic change. Bringing together traditional nonprofit measurements around poverty and impact with typical business and social enterprise measurements of efficiency and effectiveness with typical economic measurements, such as tax revenues, job creation, labour income, for deeper systemic measurement, such as increase in business-to-business services, change in investment patterns towards long-term customer relationships and emergence of new market-based products and services that respond to pro-poor needs. 
  5. A recalibration of the equilibrium. Moving systems from unjust to just, marginalisation to inclusion, structural disadvantages to systemic advantages (gender), traders to value creators, short-term transactions to long-term relationships and incremental shifts [in markets] to transformations and revolutions, 

Saturday, 22 August 2015

What does a market system specialist like me do?

Economic Development
  • Develop retail networks in developing countries to get products and services in the hands of low-income marginalised consumers
  • Help aid programmes do more systemic social welfare through systemic safety net programmes
  • Improve the enabling environment for MSMEs and the informal sector  
Social Business and CSR
  • Look at supply chain interventions that go beyond the value chain approach and take more of a systemic perspective that actually deliver benefits to poor farmers 
  • Identify different areas where CSR can be better programmed by way of a market systems approach
  • Integrate the private sector into market systems approaches that have historically focused on socialist mechanisms (large State, community associations, NGOs)
  • Work with system actors to identify areas where market systems development will make a difference
Behaviour Change
  • Train practitioners on behaviour change and behaviour change methodologies to help projects deliver systemic solutions 
  • Design behaviour change tools to improve the adoption and commitment of poor people to long terms savings and investments practices

Tuesday, 11 August 2015

The systems for welfare and safety net programmes

How are welfare and social safety net systems set up?

Broadly speaking and quite simply, welfare and benefits help people through poverty as well as respond and be resilient to unexpected external shocks, such as macroeconomic downturn and job loss, sickness and injury, and other disabilities. Welfare also helps people grow their financial and asset base and are used to supplement incomes that are considered below living wage. Welfare can also help pay for supplementary services to people overcome poverty, respond to shocks and/or grow their asset base, such as childcare or energy subsidies.

Conversely, tax systems are used to generate income in order to redistribute to welfare recipients. Tax can be applied to incomes (and conversely tax can be reduced on low incomes and personal allowance thresholds). Tax can be applied to goods and services deemed harmful to other people and the environment such as cigarettes. Tax incentives (or tax-free activities) can be applied to goods and services deemed beneficial to other people and the environment such as solar panels for household roofs.

Welfare budget - The welfare budget is formed through amount raised in taxes and more precisely, the proportion of tax income allocated to the welfare system. Who decides this proportion? How does this money get allocated? Does the amount reflect the needs of the benefit claimants within the system? According to Open Democracy: "Benefit levels in Britain reflect political decisions on the amount governments in Britain have been prepared to spend, not the total of claimants’ needs."

Welfare eligibility criteria - There are several different categories of eligibility criteria to be able to clam welfare, such as time in work, dependents, length of residency. There are also different categories of benefit types from job seeker support, to housing to sickness to occupational injury. The specific criteria will differ in different countries. Above all, claiming benefits is not an easy task for local claimants or those from elsewhere classified as migrants or immigrants. And certain welfare opportunities are not included in the benefits system because they are public goods (from clean air to access to a universal healthcare system that treats personal injury and illness especially those that are communicable, contigious and treatable) (BBC News)

Multi-territorial welfare system - Across integrated trade and economic zones (where integration includes policies and regulations as well as social networks, culture and learning), such as the European Union (EU), it was found that migrants from wealthier countries (like the UK) have the power to claim benefits from across the water, in other equally wealthy or even less wealthy countries. At times, the number of Britons claiming welfare in the EU can be larger than 'EU migrants to the UK claiming welfare in the UK' (IB Times and the Guardian)

Changes to the welfare system - Changes to the amount in the welfare system (taxation) and who gets them (welfare recipients) are brought about by those operating within the system itself. The Government may seem to have decision-making power but what analysis do they do to make decisions and who does the research? In some cases, the EU can put pressure on member states to make welfare system changes (Social Europe)

Factors that affect the ability of a welfare system to work






---
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/charlotte-rachael-proudman/welfare-benefits-are-calculated-by-political-objective
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25134521
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/britons-claiming-benefits-across-eu-outnumber-immigrants-getting-welfare-uk-1484091
http://www.socialeurope.eu/2015/02/welfare-union/

Monday, 27 July 2015

The many faces of CSR - some concerns

CSR is ...

... a collection of small piecemeal fixes that cost millions whilst companies stand in the way of wider systemic reforms (The Atlantic)

... a response to and/or a driver of ineffective regulation and enforcement mechanisms (aka corruption) (NBER Working Paper)

... the antithesis of sustainable? doing as much (or as little) as the legal compliance frameworks deem necessary, social (green)washing, a disregard for systems change and an appropriation of cheap labour and culture... (Triple Pundit)

... old, redundant and anemic, desperately seeking new energy to bring about real change both within the organisations, which espouse it as well within the markets, economies and systems in which they operate? (New Global Citizen)

... missing an opportunity to respond to new consumer-driven preferences and evolving buying behaviour?
  • Tetra Pak research found that 60 per cent of consumers that they surveyed said that they would look for environmental information on products they buy and would be influenced by what they read
  • In a survey by Mintel, 60 per cent of respondents said that guaranteeing that ingredients used in its products are responsibly sourced was of major importance (Supplymanagement.com)
  • Several brands, such as Fairtrade, pay producers a higher wage than other buyer. They demonstrate the market for niche consumer groups that have a willingness and ability to pay a significant premium for higher quality product 
  • Labour Behind the Label also makes the point that paying producers a living wage for basic products, such as t-shirts, may mean increasing the retail price by only 3%, which is something that might be barely noticed by a customer


...
http://www.supplymanagement.com/news/2015/responsible-sourcing-a-key-concern-for-majority-of-uk-consumers

Do market-based approaches hold too many false assumptions?

This blog post from the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) attempts to reflect the main challenges in implementing market-based approaches. It questions the "false assumptions" of market development and systems thinking for poverty reduction.

In fact, what is most evident is that a very damaging assumption held by policy makers and practitioners alike is that market-based approaches simply mean "business" and "market access". In fact these are two outcomes of a functioning market system - among many others - but not the end-goal. In reality, well-designed market-based approaches that adopt systemic principles also deliver the following benefits:
  • Production and supply systems that respond to demand and the needs of the market so that relationships are inherently win-win and about capturing the value within the system 
  • Inclusivity of poor, marginalised, vulnerable groups as key actors and influencers (including, women, youth, disabled, etc.) 
  • Market resilience and the ability of the system to stay strong and react positively to economic, social, political shocks even after any development intervention 
  • Innovation is from within the market itself and emergence of new products and services (both for mainstream as well as niche users)
  • Better relationships between market actors and market-driven design and testing and learning so that products and services respond to market needs 
When talking about market-based systemic approaches to poverty reduction, the first step is for all parties to get on the same page. For advisors to development projects, these are some things to look out for:
  • An inaccurate understanding of systemic thinking and a persistence towards value chain approaches. The former is about the structures, patterns and cycles in systems, and the systemic constraints that affect the functioning of a system (rather than any specific events or element or value chain). Systemic analyses then lead to solutions and leverage points that generate long-term change throughout the wider system (and not for any particular market actor value chain or sector). 
  • Visible conflicts between projects and market partners and disagreements around 'ownership' and 'control'. There can often be a tug-of-war between 'who does' and 'who pays'. The project may be doing too much and be paying too much and can be reticent to relinquish control and allow market forces and systemic pressures to take over. 
  • A lack of understanding of what a better functioning market system looks like. Poverty is often considered a 'wicked problem'. As a result, without diversity for multiple viewpoints in problem-solving, there can often be difficulty in envisioning a better future. Some projects also perceive that by formalising all things informal and turning informal activities into formal value chains will somehow naturally strengthen systems. 
  • A lack of appreciation for (and a fear of) complexity. As a result, there may be a pattern of efforts to simplify, delineate, isolate and control within specific timeframes and outcomes, leading to tick-box approaches to measuring systems change. 
  • A heavy emphasis on quantity over quality in project activities. In particular, a tendency to prioritise activities that promise large impacts for lots of beneficiaries as soon as possible ... over and above interventions at leverage points in the system that take time but draw people into the system and bring about sustainability through relationships, value creation, growth, feedback, market response and evolution 
  • A tendency to directly intervene in the market instead of employing facilitative approaches and market-based tactics. Examples: 
    • running 'project pilots' instead of working through market actors and offering opportunities for 'market exposure and idea testing' 
    • dragging actors into the market through 'cost-sharing' instead of supporting existing interest and willingness for 'early-stage market entry' 
    • organising and leading 'stakeholder forums' to get buy-in for the project's bright ideas instead of facilitating membership based groupings around common market constraints 
    • when buying down the risk in new markets, offering a heavy amount of 'financial subsidy' to businesses instead of non-financial options such as 'networking, capacity building, coaching, information-sharing and relationship-building' 
    • a lack of adequate focus on the incentives, relationships and behaviours in markets. This can be evidenced by projects that make broad assumptions about why the private sector does not already work in marginalised markets. e.g. ICT4Development projects often make the mistake that ICT constraints are primarily technical software issues, and do not spend enough time addressing the incentives and facilitating the relationships and interactions between firms and the market (mostly small rural-based enterprises).

Friday, 24 July 2015

Inclusive governance of informal markets: street vendors

Interesting article here from IIED on formalising the informal sector. The key takeaways are to look for mechanisms that incentivise and reward informal traders to participate in formal structures. And in turn, look for mechanisms that help governing bodies better understand the needs of informal traders.

Inclusive governance of informal markets: the street vendors of Surakarta
Ronnie S NatawidjajaEndang Siti RahayuJoko SutrisnoJun 2015 - IIED 
Surakarta’s informal street vendors are well known, acting as a tourism attraction and — as in many cities in developing countries — making an important contribution to the food security and incomes of the urban poor. But it wasn’t always so. Informal street vending is often ignored by policymakers, or regarded as a problem to be eliminated. This was also true in the city of Surakarta, Indonesia until the mayor led a very different dialogue-based approach. By offering street vendors desirable and well-planned physical spaces and formally recognising them as viable and important businesses, the city enabled them to make a meaningful contribution to urban transformation and economic growth. The mayor’s first programme of engagement, designed to genuinely communicate with these marginalised economic actors, saw 17 per cent of street vendors move to mutually-agreed locations 2005. By 2014, more than three quarters of informal street vendors were operating from purpose-built facilities.