Comments on: Why the Social Innovation Fund Matters http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:57:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: jay saks http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-8410 jay saks Thu, 17 Dec 2009 04:29:02 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-8410 Some good points but nonprofit organizations as you well know are community based entities that are not proactively linked to a comprehensive coordinating effort. Nonprofit communication across county's is mediocre at best. Perhaps the Office of SI will more methodically invest in the programs that work. As far as I know, there isn't a national or even a regional organization whose mission is to coordinate these large scale comparisons. Some good points but nonprofit organizations as you well know are community based entities that are not proactively linked to a comprehensive coordinating effort. Nonprofit communication across county’s is mediocre at best. Perhaps the Office of SI will more methodically invest in the programs that work. As far as I know, there isn’t a national or even a regional organization whose mission is to coordinate these large scale comparisons.

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-7331 Sean Stannard-Stockton Fri, 24 Jul 2009 18:20:25 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-7331 Hi Fran, thanks for the comment. I love the bees and trees metaphor! Hi Fran, thanks for the comment. I love the bees and trees metaphor!

]]> By: Fran Loosen http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-7329 Fran Loosen Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:48:44 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-7329 The UK has some fantastic work being done through NESTA that SIF reflects somewhat. NESTA is a powerful driver of innovation and social design thinking (transformation design) and I think we'd do well to support something like it. Geoff Mulgan from The Young Foundation has a wonderful analogy of bees and trees that it uses to describe the potential benefits of innovation diffusion. Here's a good quote: “successful innovation requires ‘bees’ (small organisations, individuals and groups who have new ideas, and are mobile, quick and able to cross-pollinate) to find receptive ‘trees’ (big organisations such as governments, companies or non-governmental organisations, which are generally poor at creativity but good at implementation, and which have the resilience, roots and scale to make things happen). Much social change is a result of a combination of the two.” (Copied from ‘Innovation in response to social challenges‘ by Nesta, March 2007-or read Social Silicon Valleys. A Manifesto for Social Change’, by the Young Foundation, 2006). I hope that we can both spend effort on replication and spreading what works, but also moving the flywheel for new ideas and new thinking that will see us through the next wave of creative change. The UK has some fantastic work being done through NESTA that SIF reflects somewhat. NESTA is a powerful driver of innovation and social design thinking (transformation design) and I think we’d do well to support something like it. Geoff Mulgan from The Young Foundation has a wonderful analogy of bees and trees that it uses to describe the potential benefits of innovation diffusion. Here’s a good quote:
“successful innovation requires ‘bees’ (small organisations, individuals and groups who have new ideas, and are mobile, quick and able to cross-pollinate) to find receptive ‘trees’ (big organisations such as governments, companies or non-governmental organisations, which are generally poor at creativity but good at implementation, and which have the resilience, roots and scale to make things happen). Much social change is a result of a combination of the two.”

(Copied from ‘Innovation in response to social challenges‘ by Nesta, March 2007-or read Social Silicon Valleys. A Manifesto for Social Change’, by the Young Foundation, 2006).

I hope that we can both spend effort on replication and spreading what works, but also moving the flywheel for new ideas and new thinking that will see us through the next wave of creative change.

]]> By: Andrew Wolk http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-7275 Andrew Wolk Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:03:26 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-7275 Sean, Thanks for your insightful comments. You bring up some good points about why this Fund has the potential to become more than just a "bureaucratic nightmare." I have some additional thoughts which I've written out in a post on my blog, outlining three additional criteria that I think the Fund should be considering. Here's a brief summary: 1. We have to be careful not to get too caught up in the dollars - because in reality, $50 million (or even $150 million after the 2-1 match) is not much. Rather, the money should be seen as a way to influence the actions of all sectors and thus achieve greater systemic change. 2. The Social Innovation Fund should be looking for organizations with proven models who are actively engaging with government in an attempt to incorporate the best parts of their model into the broader system where change can really be widespread. 3. Several states - including Texas, Louisiana, Virginia, and Minnesota - have started offices or passed legislation to find and grow what works. The Social Innovation Fund should encourage more of this - even giving funding priority to collaborations that include a state-based entity committed to ensuring the creation and growth of the most effective and sustainable models. Read the full post at andrewwolk.com and thanks again for fostering this discussion! Sean,

Thanks for your insightful comments. You bring up some good points about why this Fund has the potential to become more than just a “bureaucratic nightmare.”

I have some additional thoughts which I’ve written out in a post on my blog, outlining three additional criteria that I think the Fund should be considering. Here’s a brief summary:

1. We have to be careful not to get too caught up in the dollars – because in reality, $50 million (or even $150 million after the 2-1 match) is not much. Rather, the money should be seen as a way to influence the actions of all sectors and thus achieve greater systemic change.

2. The Social Innovation Fund should be looking for organizations with proven models who are actively engaging with government in an attempt to incorporate the best parts of their model into the broader system where change can really be widespread.

3. Several states – including Texas, Louisiana, Virginia, and Minnesota – have started offices or passed legislation to find and grow what works. The Social Innovation Fund should encourage more of this – even giving funding priority to collaborations that include a state-based entity committed to ensuring the creation and growth of the most effective and sustainable models.

Read the full post at andrewwolk.com and thanks again for fostering this discussion!

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-7268 Sean Stannard-Stockton Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:25:36 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-7268 Thanks for spurring this post Brad. David, it seems to me that the knowledge sharing is one of the ignored aspects of the bill that is really quite exciting. There's never been much of an incentive for foundations/nonprofits to sharing knowledge and maybe the Fund can add some urgency. Thanks for spurring this post Brad.

David, it seems to me that the knowledge sharing is one of the ignored aspects of the bill that is really quite exciting. There’s never been much of an incentive for foundations/nonprofits to sharing knowledge and maybe the Fund can add some urgency.

]]> By: David Crowley http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-7267 David Crowley Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:46:26 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-7267 Great points. I hadn't caught the "knowledge sharing" aspect of the legislation, I think that is significant. Great points. I hadn’t caught the “knowledge sharing” aspect of the legislation, I think that is significant.

]]> By: Brad Rourke http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters/comment-page-1#comment-7266 Brad Rourke Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:30:13 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2009/07/why-the-social-innovation-fund-matters#comment-7266 Sean, these are great answers to my questions and you've got me convinced! Sean, these are great answers to my questions and you’ve got me convinced!

]]>