Kiva’s micro-financing model, which allows people to acquire loans of as little as $25, has transformed the way many entrepreneurs in the third world conduct business. For social investors however, the relationship with these entrepreneurs and the products and services they offer can be detached and distant, lacking a real connection with the product being made. Presented with a very brief business biography and engaged with entrepreneurs in little more than a quick transaction, few lenders truly understand the financial context of the seamstress in Tajikstan, the lumber delivery woman in Peru or the rice farmer in Laos.

Here’s a concept that we developed here at Idea Couture (not commissioned by Kiva) to illustrate how social enterprises can apply whitespace mapping to create new customer experiences. From the several strategic themes that emerged from the mapping exercise came the Kiva Tea idea. The Kiva Tea Gallery bridges the investor and the entrepreneur by extending the relationship from lending to spending. This natural extension of the brand connects people across borders through sharing some of the experiences that surround tea and global tea cultures. The Kiva Tea Gallery was designed to create a greater engagement between the cultivators and consumers of tea as well as a deeper appreciation for its economies and gastronomies. Indexing the very best of old and new world Japanese architecture, with past retail experiences, Kiva Tea Gallery offer customers a series of curated tea products, services and entrepreneurial opportunities. More than a teashop, Kiva Tea Gallery makes for a truly fulfilling engaging multi-sensory experience.

Customers are invited to taste teas from independent tea producers from all over the world. Like a certain tea? Buy a bag of it. Better yet, loan funds to the farmer. The same goes for tea paraphernalia. A collection of handcrafted ceramic and cast-iron teapots, cups, trivets and steepers are exhibited and displayed for sale in the gallery. If a particular piece speaks to you, you can purchase it and even lend money to the artisan who crafted it. For the entrepreneurs supported, Kiva Tea Gallery generates increased income by setting them up not only with the resources to produce but an inherent mechanism to promote and sell. The structure is set up so that the partners and wholesale distribution channels bypass layers of middlemen.

Education is a big part of the experience at Kiva Tea Gallery. The physical locations regularly offer tastings, tea-knowledge seminars, pottery classes in the ceramics studio and nursery tutorials including gardening tips and a take-home plant. These programs and events educate the patrons in traditional and regional tea cultures and histories. Kiva Tea Gallery offers something for tea lovers and conscience consumers at all levels of engagement – whether you want to buy a bag of tea, lend $50 to a tea producer, or learn to grow and ferment your own iahpet – the Myanma pickled tea for eating.

For more active lenders, Kiva Tea Gallery offers tea travel and volunteerism programs. How would you like to visit the Sri Lankan plantation where your favorite tea is produced? Meet the farmer, smell the terrain, exchange knowledge and maybe even put in some grunt labor. Perhaps you’re more interested in a month of pottery training from the rural Chinese artisan whose teapot you purchased. Experience fascinating cultures and customs, exotic cuisine – and learn the intricacies of the tea industry – all while you establish an authentic connection through your social investment.

With its interactive platform, Kiva Tea Gallery opens the gateway to new tastes, wellness therapies, social experiences, global stories and business relationships that allow lenders to understand, experience and reap the rewards of their loans. Online visitors can surf profiles, lend money or make purchases and view Kiva-produced videos from tea growers all over the world – sharing healing and wellness knowledge as well as growing techniques. The resulting Kiva experiences can provide new and engaging experiences to anyone willing to enjoy them. The opportunities are limitless.

The name Kiva and its logo are trademarks of Kiva microfunds, a California non-profit public benefit corporation.

Cheesan Chew is VP Head of Digital Innovation at Idea Couture, a global strategic innovation and experience design firm. She spends her time between San Francisco and Toronto.

This Article has been taken from The Customer Experience Issue (Issue #3, Fall 2011) of M/I/S/C/ Magazine – a magazine dedicated to design thinking and innovation available in over 25 countries. To purchase a digital copy of the full issue and for other issues please click HERE.

The last three weeks have been a whirlwind of workshops and social innovation. A speaking engagement at the 3P conference in Kitchener had me talking to technologists, business leaders and academics about how to use Design Thinking to make social change. A week of planning sessions in Montreal was about designing extended social programs for people with chronic illness. A productive few days in DC with the World Bank had us working on distributed innovation experiences for offices around the world.

I’ll be honest. I’m exhausted. But when you’re talking about innovation change, it’s hard not to focus on the greater good.

These days, there’s a lot of interest in Idea Couture’s social innovation practice. Much like design thinking, any new and fuzzily-defined term that enters the business world is at least partly cause for buzz. But on the plus side, I know that the majority of the interest is based on the opportunity that Social Innovation presents.

This isn’t CSR. This is business. It’s making money by doing good. And it works.

From pharmaceutical companies who know that their social impact will lead to financial impact, to technologists who are looking for new learning opportunities that extend their definition of value through solving problems of social change, these last few weeks have shown me that the social innovation world is alive. The great Peter Drucker said that, “Every single social and global issue of our day is a business opportunity in disguise”. It seems as though the business world is starting to catch on.

Three years ago, I sat down with a good friend from MaRS to talk about his experience working with not for profits. At the time, I had been hitting a wall doing some business model design work for a now-defunct not for profit. To this day, I’ll remember that conversation as a turning point in my career. “The problem with so many of these (not-for-profits) is that they’re completely afraid of money,” he said. Over the next few years, I’ve grown to understand what he meant.

It’s not necessarily a fear of income – very few organizations have the ability to raise funds like a well run not-for-profit. But for some reason, the dialogue of multiple winners from a giving scenario seems to make many not-for-profit’s uneasy. But whenever a problem is solved, new value is created, and in many cases, that value is being left on the table.

Thankfully, with the number of social-entrepreneurs that I’ve met since that fateful conversation, both through our incubation experience and through talks at a number of universities, a shift is on its way. It seems as though many people realize that one possible future of giving is to also get, be it through new organizational experience, new revenue streams, or reduced operational costs. With benefits like that, it’s no wonder there’s buzz.

The shame of making money through solving real social problems is on its way out the door.

Read any CSR book, and it will tell you that companies will eventually change – not out of the kindness of their hearts, but because their customers are demanding it. While this is certainly true (our design research constantly confirms that customers are asking for social-embedded products and services), I’m now seeing a lot of companies that are shifting based primarily on operational benefits. That puts a smile on my face because the social innovation mandate is coming from both the top down and the bottom up.

I’ll make this very clear – for Idea Couture, Social Innovation means using social impact as a business strategy. It’s about creating real, tangible value for organizations through tackling social problems with ties to their core business model. The expectations are high, both in terms of financial impact, but also delivering results on social impact.

Social innovation is the future of business. It’s hard not to read that and feel a little more optimistic about what’s to come.

It’s hard to dispute that voting platforms have quickly become one of the most popular tools in the cause marketing playbook. As with any new marketing method, these platforms have been a lightning rod for criticism. This week alone, I’ve had several healthy debates with thought leaders in the CSR and Social Innovation space about their value for communities:

“They waste precious, limited charity resources”,

“They tick off the donor list”,

“They celebrate popularity, not good ideas”,

“etc…”

Yesterday morning, I was up at 5AM to attend the Year 2 Aviva Community Fund winner’s event. After another year overseeing Canada’s most successful social media and cause marketing platform, I felt inspired to share a bit more of an insiders view of how these competitions work, and why they are an extremely good thing for causes when used strategically. I have no doubt, there’ll be plenty of disagreement regarding my point of view, as I already hear it on a daily basis. I look forward to some healthy discussion.

“only a few ideas win, everyone else loses”

As someone who curates competitions and sits on the board of a charity, I’ll be the first to say that the allure of a big pot of money is seductive. You’ll be hard pressed to find an organization or school that’s overfunded, so inevitably some organizations are disappointed or angry  when they don’t win.

But to look at these competitions with the singular view that the prize is the only outcome is extremely short sighted. Well designed cause marketing platforms are marketing assets that can leveraged by both sides of the equation. Some organizations are disappointed by the outcome, while others recognize the opportunity that is presented to them the whole way through.

These programs are about marketing, and that marketing is symbiotic. Yes, brands like Aviva and Pepsi win by associating themselves with causes. But charities also win trough promoting their needs through national platforms. Having spoken to many, many, many organizations who have participated in these types of programs, far more ideas get funded than the ones announced. Smart causes use these marketing platforms as a way to bring their needs to national attention. They organize themselves to “win”, whether they get funding through the program or not, by using these programs to educate interested individuals about their needs.

Most importantly, they build a new and expanded audience, which in and of itself is an asset asset.

“they’re just a popularity contest”

Voting, and especially social media voting in a cause marketing platform, is a popularity contest. That popularity brings people to a branded site which creates exposure to the contest organizer. The formula is pretty standard there. Ultimately, a degree of any competition has to do with the ability to rally support – be it a student council vote, or voting in the AMEX Member’s Project. Inherently there’s a hope that a democratic process like voting yields a valid outcome.

The way that I view the Aviva Community Fund is in two phases – the marketing phase, and the cause phase. The marketing phase (up to selecting the finalists) is 100% participant chosen, and 100% the result of an idea’s ability to rally voters. The cause side (judging) narrows the finalist ideas to the winners using detailed criteria designed to identify the most deserving projects with the biggest impact. I reiterate, we find the best idea from a sub-set selected based on popularity. The most deserving ideas get funding.

One final thing to remember. If there’s issue with the popularity contest, we can’t forget that the dollars for programs like this come directly from the marketing budget and not a CSR budget. The result is money (which would normally go to advertising) being directed to causes.

I sure can tolerate a popularity contest if it means $1,000,000 goes to deserving ideas.

“they take a lot of work to enter”

The rationale that these competitions are a distraction is an uninformed rationale for why these platforms are bad.

First, from a pure mechanics perspective, user experience practitioners design these competitions to be as easy to use as possible. For example, in designing our idea submission forms, we deliberately made our forms as simple as possible with the recognition that good ideas come from anywhere. That means our submission process needs to be as easy for a major not for profit to complete as it is for a grade 2 student. To enter the first round of our competition, we’re talking maybe 15 minutes. Add in voting, creating a few images, and shooting a video, maybe 2 hours? The mechanics alone are a negligible distraction.

In the case of the community fund, we also built in a philosophy of progressive disclosure into our submission process, which basically means that the further you progress into the competition, the more we ask you. We needed to balance the needed for judges to evaluate an idea with the amount of effort required to enter the competition, and we didn’t want people to go through the effort of developing complex budgets until they saw the light at the end of the tunnel.

“they’re a distraction to the focus”

Aside from the mechanics, what people are probably really upset about is the effort it takeout to collect come up with ideas, market the idea, and collect votes.

On the ideas creation, I would say it’s the role of charities and community leaders to come up with new and innovative projects to help people. If anything (and I’ve been told this), we’re giving organizations a reason to think about how they can help serve their communities better. I think that’s a pretty positive outcome.

On the marketing side, perhaps one of the best outcomes of these programs is their ability to act as an educational tool. On one hand, we embed marketing education in all of our program design to help causes capture as large an audience as possible. On the other hand, idea creators and supporters are learning about how to market their charities in the age of digital media. I know from first hand conversations that participation in the Aviva Community Fund, for example, has taught a number of organizations about how to use social media.

On the votes point, see my next section.

“we’re draining our database”

If you have issues with these programs creating a distraction, perhaps you should reframe your thinking a little. Maybe a distraction is exactly what these organizations need in order to realize the level of commitment, passion, and interest out there by people who don’t have the means or desire to respond to the one tired message in the marketplace, “Donate now”.

While some people struggle with the burden of the vote, I actually think it’s refreshing to hear charities ask for help in a way other than from my pocket. Voting competitions allow charities to tell a different story, and to get people to act in a different way. Since there is less commitment in giving a vote than a dollar, I think (and have heard) that these voting platforms allow smart organizations to collect new donors as opposed to disenfranchise them. And meanwhile, any smart marketer knows to segment their database.

Voting platforms are an opportunity, and an option

Maximizing the potential of voting-based cause marketing platforms is hard work. I doubt anyone, including this year’s amazing Aviva Community Fund winners, would disagree. But to criticize them without assessing why they exist or what their potential is can be a really short sighted perspective. While it’s easy to make sweeping generalizations, if you actually take the time to analyze how some communities take advantage of these opportunities, you’ll see that they benefit as much as the brand putting on the competition.

And of course, if I still haven’t convinced you, just don’t enter. But I promise you, you’re missing out on a huge opportunity.

The Charter for Compassion is a cooperative effort to restore not only compassionate thinking but more important, compassionate action to the center of religious, moral and political life. Compassion is the principled determination to put ourselves in the shoes of the other, and lies at the heart of all religious and ethical systems.  The notion of “informed empathy” is also at the core of Idea Couture’s innovation’s process.

One of the most urgent tasks of our generation is to build a global community where men and women of all races, nations and ideologies can live together in peace. In today’s world, everybody has become our neighbor, and the Golden Rule has become an urgent necessity.

The Charter for Compassion is not simply a statement of principle; it is above all a summons to creative, practical and sustained action to meet the political, moral, religious, social and cultural problems of our time.

The Charter for Compassion Text:

The principle of compassion lies at the heart of all religious, ethical and spiritual traditions, calling us always to treat all others as we wish to be treated ourselves. Compassion impels us to work tirelessly to alleviate the suffering of our fellow creatures, to dethrone ourselves from the center of our world and put another there, and to honor the inviolable sanctity of every single human being, treating everybody, without exception, with absolute justice, equity and respect.

It is also necessary in both public and private life to refrain consistently and empathically from inflicting pain. To act or speak violently out of spite, chauvinism, or self-interest, to impoverish, exploit or deny basic rights to anybody, and to incite hatred by denigrating others—even our enemies—is a denial of our common humanity. We acknowledge that we have failed to live compassionately and that some have even increased the sum of human misery in the name of religion.

We therefore call upon all men and women ~ to restore compassion to the center of morality and religion ~ to return to the ancient principle that any interpretation of scripture that breeds violence, hatred or disdain is illegitimate ~ to ensure that youth are given accurate and respectful information about other traditions, religions and cultures ~ to encourage a positive appreciation of cultural and religious diversity ~ to cultivate an informed empathy with the suffering of all human beings—even those regarded as enemies.

We urgently need to make compassion a clear, luminous and dynamic force in our polarized world. Rooted in a principled determination to transcend selfishness, compassion can break down political, dogmatic, ideological and religious boundaries. Born of our deep interdependence, compassion is essential to human relationships and to a fulfilled humanity. It is the path to enlightenment, and indispensable to the creation of a just economy and a peaceful global community.

Those who have affirmed the Charter include the Dalai Lama, Sir Ken Robinson, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Paul Simon, Deepak Chopra, and over 9500 others since yesterday, including me.  To learn more, check out: The Charter for Compassion.

]]> http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/11/13/the-charter-for-compassion/feed/ 0 http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/06/26/social-purchasing-portal/ http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/06/26/social-purchasing-portal/#comments Sat, 27 Jun 2009 00:01:07 +0000 Andrew Lockhart http://ideacouture.com/blog/?p=1745 As part of Net Change Week at MaRS, Patrick and I were offered the opportunity to work with a non-profit called Social Purchasing Portal on helping them address some of the challenges they were facing in a variety of areas.

The Social Purchasing Portal is a program whose primary goal is to create social value through the supply chain. They do this primarily through helping those with employment barriers (single mothers, at-risk youth, people with disabilities, etc.) find work with suppliers and then in exchange promoting those suppliers to socially conscious buyers. As we delved deeper into their issues it became apparent that their true problem was sustainability. While their model had proven its ability to have a profound impact on the local community, it was not able to sustain itself in absence of government funding. The issues leading to this lack of sustainability that manifested itself in the following ways:

• Revenue – As mentioned previously, the SPP relies on grants without consistent channels for revenue.
• Resources – There is currently considerable overlap in resources allocation among the local centres. The local managers are spread incredibly thin, helping with placements as well as performing business development for a plethora of vendors.
• Program Engagement – There is little opportunity for the SPP to provide value past the initial transaction. From the buyer perspective, the impact they are making through their purchases is often invisible.
• Service Value – Given the employment practices of the suppliers, buyers are often concerned about quality. In addition, there can be high switching costs to change suppliers on a personal and organizational level.
• Branding – The name Social Purchasing Portal connotes a function quite different from their organizational purpose. In addition, there is considerable variance between the branding of the local SPPs.

Basically, the crux of their problem was that they were excellent at creating partnerships that benefitted the community, but were unable to derive any revenue from the value they were creating. As Patrick observed, their situation was a little bit like setting up two of your best friends, only to see them run fall in love, get married, live happily ever after… and never talk to you again. This became the key insight to drive our solution.

The Social Purchasing Portal was essentially operating as a dating service, but without any membership fees or advertising revenue. They needed a new metaphor. Since they were facilitating transactions, the logical decision was for them to move to a market metaphor.

Revenue
The key to creating a consistent revenue stream for the Social Purchasing Portal is to become a facilitator of transactions, which is something the Internet does quite well (see PayPal, eBay, Craigslist, Amazon). Since the users of the Social Purchasing Portal have opted into the program in the hopes of making a difference, it makes sense to empower them to help rathern than force them to so instead of simply charging transaction fees, which may present a barrier for some buyers, upon registration, all buyers are given the option of donating a percentage of each purchase they make to the SPP, which can be increased or decreased on a transaction to transaction basis during the checkout process.

Additional revenue streams will occur through providing escrow services (which could help mitigate some of the perceived risks) and certifying suppliers who aren’t operating in any of the current centres as well as certifying national-level suppliers (we are recommending the addition of a national business development person to deal with national organizations).

Resources
In addition to consolidating under a singular technical platform, eliminating parallel efforts on behalf of the local development teams, the implementation of the marketplace will remove the burden on the local SPP managers of trying to learn and sell a series of individual suppliers to potential. Instead, they can focus on selling the marketplace.

Program Engagement
In order to keep buyers engaged, reward them and incent them to continue to transact through the SPP, a form of social currency based on community impact was introduced, allowing buyers to track their impact on an ongoing basis and incorporate it into their marketing messaging or CSR programs. In addition, suppliers will be able to update their profile pages and by extension their buyers with the first hand stories of the people that are being impacted by the program. In addition, the platform merchandises the various suppliers and provides a frictionless browsing and search experience.

Branding
The Social Purchasing Portal was open to us taking a stab at developing a new brand that could help unify the organization on a national level and better represent their mission. We felt the brand needed to fulfill four criteria:

• Connote the mission of creating social value
• Communicate competitive prices and quality from the suppliers
• Provide something that can act as a seal for suppliers and buyers to communicate their values and involvement.
• An easily obtainable and memorable URL

With that in mind, our recommendation was Third Win. Ideally, every transaction should be a win-win situation. However, what differentiates the SPP is that the community wins, hence the “Third Win.” Also, thirdwin.com was shockingly available.

Service Value
By incorporating user feedback and supplier ratings, buyers can better evaluate suppliers. In addition, the option of escrow can provide a greater feeling of security. Also, by participating in the program, buyers are able to use the Third Win seal to communicate their values to their customers with a variety of tiers available depending on their achievement based on the social currency.

With these strategies implemented, Third Win will not only have the opportunity to sustain itself, but also to grow and help transform the national business landscape through a mutually beneficial ecosystem.

Moving forward we see several options for future expansion for Third Win:

Broaden the certification system -Currently, suppliers are only evaluated on their hiring practices, there is a great opportunity to create a more multi-faceted ranking system to include environmental factors, community leadership and others to allow buyers to shop not just based on product, but on the impact of the suppliers.

• Consumer purchases – Currently, many of the suppliers already operate in both B2B and B2C contexts, why not invite another segment in to enrich the marketplace?
• Co-operative bulk buying – Often local and socially conscious products and services have difficulty competing due to their lack of scale. However, if the Third Win platform could be leveraged to allow for bulk buying, the competitiveness of businesses could be increased in a radical way.
• Allow buyers to request proposals – This would be a feature that could help attract buyers to the marketplace as well as increase platform engagement with both buyers and suppliers.
• Extend the certification – Given the proposed nature of the Third Win seal, certification could be extended from beyond just companies to products.