Skip to main content

Leadership Tools for New Social Ventures

David Castro's book Genership 1.0: Beyond Leadership Toward Liberating the Creative Soul offers some thoughts on leadership that can be valuable to new social ventures in particular. Bad assumptions, the quest for salvation and barriers to effective group thinking could all undermine a social venture.

Assumptions in Social Venture Planning:

New social ventures should proceed on sound assumptions. This statement should sound familiar and obvious. Putting an idea into practice— by testing assumptions and rejecting the bad ones—does not always happen. This fact is evident in how individuals in organizations plan and solve problems.

Castro reminds us that the past might not be a reliable guide for the present. He points out that past experiences often don't translate because the current social environment is not like the past social environment. This is only a problem when social entrepreneurs forget that what worked for their heroes and mentors thirty years ago may no longer be applicable.

Assuming that lessons learned in the past are still useful is one thing, but not the only thing. Other assumptions about technology, human relations and economics might no longer apply. Indeed assumptions about the way to structure a new organization or program might not apply. That's not to say most learning from the past needs to be ignored; just revisit anything critical to the new enterprise.

Looking for Salvation:

Many times a group with a big challenge will look outside for some guru or champion who can fix things. This is a real recipe for problems according to Castro's analysis of leadership fallacies. Wise social entrepreneurs will focus on resources that are already available to the group: ideas, creativity and specialized knowledge.

A management guru, strategy consultant or big donor will not save the day either. Or, at least the wise entrepreneur would not want to depend on that. Social venture groups need to save themselves instead of looking for a nonprofit savior.

Thinking at the Right Level:

The level of thinking that group members are at can be a serious barrier to effective thinking. Castro writes about four levels of thinking that might exist in an organization.

Sheep do not think much—about thinking or anything. Sheep just do things reflexively and therefore have little desire to create anything new and useful or to come up with better ways to solve problems. Sheep-like thinking in a social venture leads to nonproductive behavior. Social ventures are not likely to germinate from group thinking at this level.

Groupthink is the second level of thinking in a group. Having everyone “on the same page” is important, but it runs the risk of prompting everyone to go along with ideas that are not necessarily the best ideas. Real discussion about challenges and opportunities may not happen at this level of thinking.

The next step up in effective thinking comes when group members start to debate things. At this level of thinking, people begin to question ideas and opinions and defend their own ideas about what the group should do. This level of thinking allows room for some innovation and learning, but real progress might still beg a higher level of group thinking.

A high-functioning group will have members who prefer to engage in dialogue, a mutual exploration of a subject. Dialogue leaves room for some disagreement and argument, but the group members are committed to working together and “figuring things out” in whatever form that activity might take. This is the state of affairs the founders of a social venture should aim for.

Leadership Challenges Have Solutions:

Any effort to start a new program, movement or charity will be full of challenges with which effective leadership or collaboration will be difficult. Ineffective thinking just makes things more difficult. Future posts will explore effective thinking in social ventures in more detail. Castro's ideas on effective thinking—and the barriers to it—can help prompt more honest exploration of a path toward dynamic and successful social ventures.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Using SWOT Analysis to Rev Up Your Fundraising

Strategic planning, including SWOT analysis, is for small nonprofits, giant philanthropic foundations, and every other nonprofit. Every nonprofit that seeks financial support of any kind needs a strategy.  The point is to make a plan and work the plan. Business gurus have shared a bunch of strategic planning tools, some generic and some made for a specific purpose. This post is about looking at your Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats - SWOT.  Knowing about your organization's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats is step one in planning your fundraising efforts.  SWOT - A Quick Review This is not the best place to run through SWOT analysis, but an overview will make it obvious why we need to do it. First, however, you should write down your fundraising goal. Then, you can do some analysis. Here are the steps: Strengths - What about your financial resources? What about your reputation and your connections? How big is your audience on social medi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Program Design Tips That Really Work

Program Design Are there better ways to start or improve nonprofit programs? This blog is about building better nonprofits, so you probably hope I'll have more answers than questions. I do. I've written about many brainstorming techniques that you might be able to employ generically for dealing with any nonprofit challenge. This post summarizes some of those ideas and explains how to apply them to program design. A simple desire to challenge ideas, assumptions, and requirements would be a good place to start. What are the assumptions and usual requirements for a certain type of program? Write them down and examine each one to see if it is valid. Verify that each requirement is really a requirement now, and not a bad assumption or an outmoded idea. Spend about 10 minutes on this exercise.. Break down program design into component parts and look at each of the components. using either stratals or the filament technique. The filament technique calls for writing down the us...
Post a Comment
Read more

9 Ways Cognitive Bias Undermines Social Change Efforts

This is going to be the first of many posts on how cognitive bias might undermine social change efforts. Yeah, I know. I will do my best to keep this concrete and interesting. A number of quirks in how our brains work might lead to mistaken judgments in many areas relevant to social change: problem analysis, strategy, program design, and advocacy. Maybe fundraising. Taking effective action on a certain problem is what activists want to do, so we'll come back to fundraising later. 1.Confirmation bias may cause us to look for reasons why a certain strategy or tactic is the right one. Supportive evidence gets woven into the narrative, lending support to the need for more education for women or more gun control or whatever the topic might be. Negative information gets tossed out. 2. Bandwagon effect -This may be a real problem when the resources devoted to addressing an issue get all of proportion to the seriousness of an issue. Instead, bandwagon jumping siphons away money and v...
Post a Comment
Read more