Cambridge Module 3

na

• Social proofing (leveraging the power of consumer opinion and perceived demand to create a perception of the product or service’s popularity, for example, through celebrity endorsements, user testimonials and reviews or making subscriber or membership numbers visible);

• social proofing
• framing suggestions (what motivates people?)
• prompting and reminding at carefully-selected moments
• choice editing (opt-out rather than opt-in)

Disclosure of info --> consultation --> Dialogue --> Collaboration --> Partnership or Empowerment

one way               --> obtaining irreg. feedback --> regular two way comm. --> joint initiatives --> shared responsibility and decision making

say what you need to do, not necessarily what you have done.

Greenwashing (before measures put in place)

no overclaims

not working jointly

Stage: Make and Sell. Marketing is end-of-pipe creation

Stage: Sense and Respond: Satify customer needs and thus maximize profits

(asset loaded companies, based on rational customer)

New stage: Guide and Co-Create. Co's drive S for well-being outcomes. Purposeful 

stakeholder engagement

reporting

new media

eco-labelling

branding

marketing

Vision

• Always comes first
• Make it visual
• Make it national or local
• Make it sizzle
• Reduce dates and figures

Choice

• Introduce hell
• choice is now
• link problem to a solution
• personal hell

Plan

• shortlist of big actions
• 5 year complete
• show me money / reality check

Action

• use numbers here
• What is in it for me?
• Next action

Our brains have a nifty little switch called the ‘availability heuristic’, which makes us more inclined to believe those things we can imagine most vividly. 

The 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda includes 17 inter-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), each representing complex systems -- such as climate, food, health, cities -- with myriad stakeholders. Achieving progress on this agenda requires a departure from traditional top-down, hierarchical and linear approaches to implementing change. Instead, it requires innovative and adaptive approaches that engage broad networks of diverse stakeholders to advance progress toward a shared vision for systemic change. This approach is called Systems Leadership.

• the individual
  • collaborative leadership skills
• the community
  • coalition building and tactics
• the system
  • complex system insights

5 elements of systems change process

1. Convene & commit
   1. define shared interest and goals, and commit to work together
2. Look and Learn
   1. build shared understanding of components, actors, dynamics...
3. Engage and Energize
   1. continuous communication to build trust, commitment, innovation & collaboration
4. Act with Accountability
   1. coordination and governance structures
5. Review and Revise
   1.  

1. Consult: Limited two-way engagement – the organisation asks questions and stakeholders answer (for example, surveys, public meetings or workshops).
    
2. Negotiate: Collective bargaining – for example, between employers and workers or between employers and the trade union that represents a group of workers.
    
3. Involve: Two-way or multi-way engagement – learning on all sides, but stakeholders and the organisation act independently; for example, through multi-stakeholder forums, advisory panels or focus groups.
    
4. Collaborate: Two-way or multi-way engagement – joint learning, decision-making, actions and shared responsibility; for example, partnerships, joint projects or multi-stakeholder initiatives.
    
5. Empower: New forms of accountability – decisions are delegated to stakeholders, who then play a role in governance; for example, integration of stakeholders into governance, strategy and operations management.

• engage broad networks of diverse stakeholders
• enable innovation by exposure to external ideas and human capital
• enable scalability 
• enable continuity

MSP multiple stakeholder partnerships value added:

Value added as a whole

• 1+1>2
• Individual benefit P > Individual benefit alone
  • Complementarity (reaching something that could not be achieved alone)
  • Standards (across a whole sector)
  • Innovation (achieve otherwise impossible outcomes)
  • Critical Mass (combining resources)
  • Holism (across traditional silos)
  • Collective learning and capability building
  •  

1. Credibility

• diluted responsibility
• power struggles behind scenes
• individual members claiming all credit
• free-loading

2. Accountability

• not easy to measure. need to agree beforehand.

3. Time Delay till results

4. Managing diversity and conflict

• Networks
• Coalitions
• Collaborations
• Integrated partnerships

na

eg. accenture providing experts for plastic fee oceans

Partners in resourcing partnerships determine how jointly-managed resources of any nature – for example, financial and intellectual best practice or social capital – should be allocated among third parties, or to jointly select recipients of rewards or awards (including corporate philanthropy efforts). 

Such resource transfer partnerships could be based on a financial grant mechanism, a provider of vaccines or equipment, a joint provider of logistical support or a collaborative mechanism to recognise and reward excellence.  

Key challenges include:

• A dynamic where those who “bring” the resource generally have the highest interest in ensuring the credibility or worthiness of the recipients; and

• Ensuring that there is no appearance (real or otherwise) of a conflict of interest in the decisions, recommendations, or votes of a partner. Decision makers may be asked to sign a code of conduct indicating that they will act with integrity and respect confidentiality and other principles of behaviour.

Such collaborative forms include

alliances,

coalitions,

round tables,

public–private partnerships (PPPs) and

multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs).

1) PPPs         2) MSP

1) contract based/vertical   2) less emphasis on transaction rather horizontal accountability

1) specific targets, deliverables, time frames   2) greater flexibility / evolution

1) legal and regulatory constraints      2) within legal constraints, but partnership unregulated

1) Limited stakeholder engagement expected 2) extensive stakeholder engagement

1. Rule-setting

2. Resourcing

3. Service and implementation; and

4. Innovation and enhancing learning RRSIIEL

• P are simple and straightforward to implement
• P are not hindered by competition because of mutually agreed goal
• Implementing generic, tried-and-tested P models ensures success
• P are trust-based agreements
• The voluntary nature of P ensures engagement and meaningful contributions
• P are permanent

• Corporate Social Investment CSI ~philantropic contributions
• CSR inititaives address business risks and challenges by promoting responsible ESG practices
• Shared value initiatives ~societal challenges as a business proposition

• collaboration over competition (often not in core business issues) eg. cups between McD and Starbucks
• Increasing importance of tech and data to inform and empower collaborative working initiatives
• increasing interest in new players, eg. BRIV
• More strategic partnerships (linked to core business rather than CSR) especially in poor countries
• Partnerships for public, private and collective goods

na

palm oil, soy, beef and paper and pulp

Social intrapreneur, n. 1 Someone who works inside major corporations or organizations to develop and promote practical solutions to social or environmental challenges where progress is currently stalled by market failures.

2 Someone who applies the principles of social entrepreneurship inside a major organization.

3 One characterized by an ‘insider-outsider’ mindset and approach.

IC = industrial systems start to mimic natural ecosystems, eg. there are no landfills in nature. So nature has a way of continuously recycling and repurposing its waste. = system level concept as no way a single firm could do it alone. Company needs to see itself as a holistic system. not easy to implement as openness is required. requires Champions.