Way We Work

SchoolTools is an open source system designed to help remotely-located schools in the developing world share data with national governmental ministries of education. Like public health projects with similar goals, SchoolTools uses Ubuntu and SMS.

I stumbled on the following video about SchoolTools on Makezine website. "Make" is for people who - as you might guess - like to make things with technology in their spare time. I'm looking forward to the upcoming family-friendly World Maker Faire in New York on September 25 and 26. I think its a great opportunity to get my kids excited about experimenting, inventing, and creating with no exams or grades involved. I'd like them to appreciate school and learning from teachers, but also have confidence that they can learn a lot just through their own independent explorations.

Expect Humans, Not Heroes

26 days ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I had a great evening in the city recently catching up a pair of finance professionals establishing a nonprofit consultancy. I walked away believing more than ever that we desperately need superheroes - in business or society - yet we are all mere humans. As a result, we build networks and collaborate to solve big challenges. The media loves lone heroes – the billionaire entrepreneur, the celebrity humanitarian, the mad scientist - but we rarely see the army of supporters behind them.

I met the two business partners through a mutual friend who is a part of both the Coro NY Leadership Center and Teach for America alumni communities (a kind of “bridge” between networks). They nurture and develop social interest startups by supplying much needed capital, as well as business and banking expertise, to early stage social entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurs they help are extraordinary people - talented, driven and passionate - yet they cannot be expert in all things. These business partners use their private sector background to ask the right questions and advise on business planning, management and finance so that “big ideas” can grow and have real impact over time.

In my own efforts to get technology-related volunteer efforts started at work, I’m discovering the importance of finding the right partner. It’s clear where we’re strong as volunteers and what we have to offer, as well as our constraints (e.g., time, work demands). A partner can be a non-profit that is experienced in managing skilled corporate volunteers, or possibly another like-minded business that is already involved in its own pro-bono efforts. The right partner is able to get maximum benefit from our skills while working within our limitations as volunteers.

I’ve had the pleasure of talking to several fantastic organizations doing great work while investigating volunteer options. However, I have to admit it’s been more of a challenge to find an arrangement that is sustainable for the volunteers and our department, and more benefit than effort for the recipient. Luckily, we have a couple experiments in the works that seem to put us in the right direction.

Finding Your "Why"

2 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

In my last post, I discussed that even unglamorous, low profile 'dirty jobs' can be rewarding. According to a new book profiled in CIO Magazine, "The Why of Work", even 'happiness' is optional. It all comes down to finding a sense of purpose, i.e., knowing why you do what you do.

In this long period of tough economic times, many company perks that supposedly made people "happy" are no longer available. Budgets are lean. As news headlines constantly remind us, basic job security can't be assumed. An atmosphere of persistent stress and worry takes its toll, and "The Why of Work" warns that employees can experience an internalized "psychological recession" that endures even after business begins to recover. The authors are encouraging us to shake it off and get back to living with abundance.

I'm reminded of a book that had a big impact on me in college, Victor Frankl's "Man's Search for Meaning". As both a psychiatrist and a prisoner in a WWII Nazi concentration camp, Frankl observed that prisoners who felt a deep sense of meaning had a better chance of survival. Some extraordinary people responded to their hard times by becoming even more generous and concerned for others, even though they had every reason to be self protective. Obviously, this is an extreme case (and hopefully your work doesn't feel like a prison camp!!). But it shows that while we may not choose our circumstances, we are free to choose our response. It also shows that purpose can't be dictated or taken away by an authority. Its uniquely individual and belongs 100% to you.

Helping employees find meaning in work is good for business, though. Connecting work goals to a larger personal purpose builds resilience, and allows people to stay creative and engaged in times where change and uncertainty is constant. The catch for managers is that you cannot tell people what their purpose is, and finding purpose can take hard work, exploration and introspection. Its not as straightforward as providing financial incentives, casual Friday, free snacks, or other perks.

At my workplace, two colleagues are tasked with the daunting challenge of 'inspiring' our department. They are wisely avoiding a prescriptive approach, and instead opening some great opportunities for people to explore and share what is meaningful to them. (The Why of Work offers tools like checklists and questionnaires that can be helpful for some people, as well).

I wouldn't say I'm always in touch with my purpose, but I'm getting better at it. A big 'aha' moment was when I started volunteering my professional IT skills towards global health projects and supporting science/technology education. Volunteering is a passion, and it often makes me happy. But it also takes money and precious personal time away from my family. What drives me to make the sacrifice is the realization that I can have an impact on issues that matter. My purpose is aligned personally and professionally. Volunteering builds my capacity as a private sector professional, and professional growth at work means I have more to contribute to social impact work. I'm better able to provide for my family, while actively living and demonstrating my values in action for my children.

Everyone will find their own source of inspiration, but I appreciate that I work in an environment that supports diverse interests. We recently had a 'Take your Daughters and Sons to Work Day". I wonder (somewhat tongue in cheek, of course) what a "Take Yourself to Work Day" would look like. Who would we meet?

Is it necessary to have a passion for work?

3 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I've taken for granted that doing work I'm passionate about will also make me more productive and effective. I hear variations on this idea all the time (most recently in a talk by Seth Godin, as described in my last post).

I was pleasantly surprised, then, to stumble on a contradictory TED talk by Mike Rowe of Discovery Channel's popular show Dirty Jobs. If you haven't seen the show, Mike Rowe travels the country spending a day in the life of someone doing hands-on manual labor, respectfully highlighting the humorous side of unglamorous and often unseen jobs that are nonetheless very necessary.

Mike Rowe claims that the admonishment to 'follow your passion' was the worst career advice he ever got. In 4 years of taping the show, he has seen people do well personally and financially by taking on jobs that no one else wants to do. He speaks to the dignity and value of work that is not high profile or creative, but which makes the "big ideas" feasible to implement and scale. We celebrate the innovation of the iPhone, for example, while forgetting the people and effort required to produce iPhones in volume at high quality, or deliver them to stores. We devalue manual work and steer young people away from skilled trades, such as plumbing or welding.

As an IT professional, I see that strategy, design and new "greenfield" development with the latest technology is often seen as the most exciting and prestigious. We rarely celebrate the challenging work required to maintain and support existing systems that allow core business processes to function, thoroughly test new changes, or promptly resolve issues to get end users back to work. Its a good reminder to me to appreciate all the important work that others do to make my work easier, and find meaning even in the mundane aspects of my job that have impact "behind the scenes".

Doing well by doing good

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

The NYC Symposium for Social Change on Monday attracted a broad mix of New York professionals including social entrepreneurs, philanthropists, investment managers, and others. I was fortunate to spend the morning at Lincoln Center listening to the speakers and panelists discuss the essential role of the private sector in education, the environment and social impact investing.

The day started with two guest speakers. Joel Klein, the Chancellor of NYC Department of Education, delivered an upbeat appraisal of how innovations are improving public school performance. Seth Godin, author of Linchpin and other well-known marketing books, followed up by encouraging attendees to connect to our passions and do meaningful work. He argued that we are in a new economic reality where we are all artists who need to be doing work that we pour our hearts and creative energy into. Otherwise, he says we risk becoming replaceable cogs in corporate machinery who are rewarded for obedience, not originality. We need to stand out, not fit in, and look for opportunities to be innovative and unique.

For me, the highlight of the education panel discussion was learning the concept of a "classroom of one", where curriculum and assessment can be tailored to individual needs, abilities, learning style, and interests. I am often underwhelmed by proposals to use technology in the classroom; simply introducing computers without adapting underlying processes won't be very impactful. With a Classroom of One concept, I finally see an opportunity to make a fundamental shift in how education is delivered, and it would not be possible without technology.

For the environmental panel, I was particularly interested to hear representatives from American Express, Con Edison and the Mayor's Office of Sustainability agree that there are still huge opportunities for companies to implement "green" initiatives that actually benefit the bottom line. Businesses can do well by doing good, while motivating their employees and serving their customers better.

From the social impact investing panel, we learned that the $300 billion available in the US for private philanthropy is dwarfed by the $50 trillion in for-profit investment. Social impact investing attracts private capital into socially beneficial investments that may generate a profit. Opportunities include building low income housing, financing "green" retrofits of apartments, and guaranteeing loans for charter schools. With private capital meeting these investment needs, philanthropic resources are freed up for social problems that don't have market-driven solutions.

Social impact investing can deliver a similar return to traditional investing, however measuring social impact is an ongoing challenge. The Impact Reporting and Investment Standards is a start for providing transparency and consistency in reporting. McKinsey has a website with resources for measuring social impact.

Lunchtime speakers wrapped up the day, including Seth Pinsky from the NYC Economic Development Corporation (EDC) discussing the ways the city is nurturing innovation and entrepreneurship.

I walked away with a feeling that there are individuals across the private sector attempting to address our most pressing social problems with their own perspectives, approaches and resources. Forums like this one, sponsored by the Foundation for Social Change, create an important platform for people interested in social innovation to share information and collaborate, and hopefully scale the best ideas.

Connect

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

There are a few events coming up in the area of technology and social impact. Here are a couple worth highlighting:

Google and the MTA are hosting an "unconference" for developers. The MTA has openned their data sets, including maps and scheduling information, which can be used for transit tools and mashups on websites or mobile devices. In this time of severe budget cuts and service disruptions, the MTA is making a bold and smart move that will benefit customers with no additional cost in taxes or fees. This is a great example of a public-private partnership where everyone benefits.

The conference will be held at Google's Manhattan offices on May 5 from 6:30 - 10:00pm. Program highlights include:

Registration is free at the http://www.mta.info/developers/conf.html

Public/private partnerships will also be explored at New York City Symposium for Social Change: Building Businesses that Impact Our World. This event is scheduled for Monday, May 3 from 8:00am - 2:30pm at Lincoln Center. The event brings together representatives from Wall Street, foundations, think tanks, nonprofits to mobilize businesses to benefit New York City.

Register at nycsymposium.eventbrite.com. Type in "Friendly/Guest" where appropriate to waive the admission fee.

The Power of Partnerships

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Whether you're following the slashing of local school budgets, burgeoning national debt, or global climate change, its easy to feel overwhelmed by the daunting, complex social challenges we're facing these days. How is it possible for one person to make a difference in the face of daunting obstacles? I'm increasingly seeing the potential of partnerships.

Even the rich and powerful are limited in what they can do independently. Warren Buffet made history in 2006 as the most generous philanthropist of all time when he decided to give most of his $44 billion fortune to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He wisely determined that he was better at making money than giving it away. Simply having money is not enough. Bill Gates, in turn, has billions of dollars of his own and expertise in business and philanthropy. However, even he has turned to partnerships to accomplish social impact goals. In the area of global health, the Gates foundation formed the GAVI Alliance, a public/private partnership of donor governments, private foundations, vaccine manufacturers, and multilateral institutions including the UN, UNICEF and the World Bank. The scale of the need for vaccines in developing countries is so vast, and the scope of change required in health and economic systems so great, that even a wealthy foundation can't be very effective alone.

I recently had a chat with Jeff Wishne, the Director of Social Impact for Thoughtworks software consultancy, about how he leverages partnerships. He has put put together innovative and cost effective programs that allow employees to use their "beach" time between client engagements to contribute to open source software for mobile health projects in Africa. Thoughtworks collaborates with non-profit partners to project manage the overall effort, provide ongoing consistency and quality control, and cue up work so that employees can make a significant contribution in short, unpredictable bursts of 'downtime'. Thoughtworks also benefits in employee recruitment and retention, as well as access to new ideas and technologies.

I was inspired to find ways that the AppDev group can use creative partnerships to make a greater impact with a limited amount of volunteer time.

Negotiating when there are few good options

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

If you're a New Yorker, you've probably heard about the financial trouble and $800 million budget shortfall facing the MTA and the city's mass transit system. Yesterday, I spent the day with my Coro Leadership New York cohort exploring this issue in depth. I discovered, among other fascinating facts, that its always more fun to discuss finances from the gorgeous penthouse roof deck of a downtown Mahattan loft. Many thanks to our hosts The Open Planning Project, a nonprofit that develops open source software for transit applications - http://www.openplans.com/.

We had guest speakers from the MTA and the influential advocacy group Straphangers Campaign, and later interviewed key decision makers around the city. We then conducted a contentious budget negotiation exercise in a historic subway car in the NY Transit Museum in Brooklyn. This very cool museum is actually underground in a converted subway station, and well worth a trip to see the generations of restored subway cars, sections of buses, turnstiles, photographs, etc.

The budget negotiation exercise really brought home how difficult it is to decide on budget cuts with so many varied implications - job loss, accessibility for students and disabled riders, ability of employees to travel to their jobs and associated economic impact, long term infrastructure costs, etc. I was also stuck by the inherent tension that decision makers face when advocating for their interests and that of their constituents, while also taking into account what is fair and right for the region.

I'm sorry to see Coro coming to an end next month, though its an interesting time of transition. Soon we will no longer be students and instead 'alums' with the skills, resources and also responsibility to apply all we've seen and learned in a meaningful way.

Applications are being accepted now for 2010-11 Coro programs including Leadership New York and the Immigrant Civic Leadership programs. Check out the website for details: http://www.coro.org/

More reading about the MTA budget crisis, proposed cuts and fare hike:

• New York Times: Transit Agency Approves Cuts, and More Bad News Looms
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/nyregion/25mta.html?emc=eta1
• AM New York: MTA: Service Cuts are Less Doomsday and More “Restructuring”
http://amny.com/urbanite-1.812039/mta-service-cuts-are-less-doomsday-and-more-restructuring-1.1722534
• New York Post: Hike MTA Fares Now http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/hike_mta_fares_now_I5yPUlYG6UmDBKonUCAFZI
• The Phantom Token Booth: MTA Cuts Station Agents
http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/152720
• 2nd Avenue Sagas: Disabled, Students Hardest Hit in MTA Budget
http://secondavenuesagas.com/2009/12/14/disabled-students-hardest-hit-in-mta-budget/#comments

Kanban vs. Scrum - Lessons Learned

5 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

My team recently used Kanban for the first phase of a software platform upgrade project. After a recent release we are taking the opportunity to transition to Scrum going forward. This was my first experience with Kanban, and led to some lessons learned from a Product Owner's perspective that may be helpful for choosing between the frameworks for future software projects.

At the highest level, Kanban is a 'pull' system, where the development team takes units of work ("stories") from a prioritized queue of pending requests. When the work is complete, the team selects the next item from the pending queue. The Product Owner may make as many changes as desired to the pending list until an item is selected. In contrast, Scrum teams commit to delivering a total number of story points within a fixed "sprint" iteration. Once the sprint begins, the scope of work for the sprint is fixed. There are several sites providing an overview and comparison between Scrum and Kanban, so I won't try to improve on them here.

Kanban
The biggest advantage of Kaban came from not being bound to fixed-duration iterations (typically 1 or 2 week sprints). We moved an existing inventory of reports, which varid in size and complexity, to an upgraded environment. Our stories - typically a report or "package" of reports - didn't fit neatly into the fixed timebox of a sprint. Attempting to size the stories to make them comply didn't seem to add value to the project. Instead, pending work was queued up by business priority, and the developers simply selected additional work off the queue when the existing stories were complete, in assembly line fashion.

As a result, there was less overhead for planning and estimating. Until a report has been run in the new environment, it is difficult to predict how much rework a set of reports will require to make it work in the upgraded environment. Velocity from one set of reports does not have much value in predicting the velocity for the next set. Instead, I looked backward and took an average of the throughput time (i.e., actual time required to move through the development phase) to help gauge progress.

It is also easy with Kanban to allow an urgent request jump the queue to take priority. This is good or bad depending on your perspective. There is no need to protect the scope of the current sprint, beyond the immediate story that is in progress.

Scrum
Despite these advantages, we ultimately decided to use Scrum going forward for a couple reasons. While Scrum is still relatively lightweight on processes, it provides more structure than Kanban. The process of discussing stories and assigning story points prompts helpful team discussions. A commitment to deliver a certain amount of work is made at the beginning of each sprint, providing some additional discipline and transparency.

Best of both?
There are ways to modify either process to take on some of the qualities of the other. For instance, I'm keeping my Kanban visual board, which works equally well with Scrum. One week
sprints can also increase the team's responsiveness to changing business priorities. To make story pointing more feasible, it could have been possible to have a story for impact assessment in one sprint, allowing for a more reliable estimate on complete testing and rework in the next sprint. In fact, this is what we are starting to do now.

Generally, Kanban seems especially helpful in an operations or helpdesk type environment where sprints of any fixed duration may not be practical. Scrum is my preferred methodology for software development work given the increased structure provided, though Kanban could work for some teams as well.

I'd be interested to hear from others who have experience with both Kanban and Scrum.

See also:
Henrick Kniberg's blog - comparison of scrum and agile
Putting the Lean in Agile - What can we learn from Kanban?

Supporting the next generation of technologists

5 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I recently had the opportunity to judge at the New York City Science and Engineering Fair (NYCSEF), held on March 7 at City College. NYCSEF is the largest city-wide science, math and technology research competition for high school students.

About 500 students were competing for 20 spots at an international competition in May. I was inspired by some very strong, polished, and well prepared students, along with the impressive resources being offered by NYC government agencies, research institutions, and universities. It was good to join 200+ area professionals who want to support and encourage young people who are potentially interested in a career in science, technology, engineering or math (STEM).

I was particularly moved by a pair of enthusiastic students who were collecting survey data to advocate for the health of their classmates and influence school policy. In the short time we had to talk, I was able to give them some basic feedback about using data to build a case and influence decision makers. In my focus on encouraging STEM careers, I had overlooked the power of math and statistics literacy for anyone who wants to have a voice and make an impact in their community. I wonder how many more students could be excited about math if they saw practical applications to their everyday life.

See: http://collegenow.cuny.edu/sciencefair

Crowdsourcing Crisis Information

6 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

When I stumble on a really innovative technology application for the social good, it seems that web designers are in the thick of things (IDEO comes prominently to mind). Today I'm looking at ushahidi.com, an open source platform for crowdsourcing information on a crisis/disaster relief efforts and displaying it visually on a map or timeline. The link comes compliments of the IXDA discussion forum, a professional network for interaction design professionals. For people interested in efforts to help Haiti, or developers or designers looking to contribute their skills to a good cause, this site is definitely worth a look.

Are women more interested in the social good?

6 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

At ACM and other IT industry groups, it seems a shift in thinking is underway in how to attract more girls and young women into careers in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). By emphasizing the social impact of technology and its contribution to society, the story goes, more women will be interested in participating. Boys are interested in machines, while girls are interested in communications and people. But is this true?

An article in the February issue of Interactions Magazine quotes the results of recent research:

Possibilities

7 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

When I picked my son up from kindergarten on Friday, he was wide eyed and excited about Martin Luther King day. He told me "Can you believe there used to be 'Whites Only' signs?! Blacks didn't even get paid the same as whites at their jobs. Dr. King fought to help people. Why would someone want to kill him?"

Yikes. I'd honestly been thinking about what to make for dinner, and now this? I struggled to explain a mindset that I don't understand myself. What is an adequate answer to the question "why?"

I can understand my son's bewilderment at descriptions of American life before the civil rights movement. Very young kids are learning everything for the first time without pre-conceived expectations; our fuss over "firsts" don't always make sense to them. In the last presidential election, my kids had fun taking sides in a highly unusual primary race between a woman and an African American man. (My son rooted for Clinton because Grandma liked her. My 2 year old liked Obama because it was fun to say his name.) And then there was that female VP candidate who almost stole the show. A homogeneous government would seem strange and out of place to them now. At the movie "The Princess and the Frog" this weekend, Disney's first African American princess similarly failed to surprise. Growing up in a multicultural community with a high population of immigrants, my kids simply expect diversity in all areas of life.

If dreams are powerful, expectations are even more so. The Wright Brothers' first airplane flight in 1903 only lasted 12 seconds and covered 120 feet. More important than how far they flew that day, they had redefined forever what was possible. There was still far to go before we had the Concord and space travel, and expected commercial airplanes to take us to any corner of the globe we wished to visit, but progress was unstoppable.

Martin Luther King famously had a dream that sparked many "firsts" and changed the country in fundamental ways. I'm sad to see my son's innocence fade as he grows up and learns not just about King's dream but also the work left undone, even today. For now, I emphasize the positive. I tell him if he sees injustice in the world, he has the power to do something about it, and change it. We know what is possible.

See:
2010 MLK Day Technology Challenge at www.serve.gov

New Ways of Getting News and Giving Help

7 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

With the terrible disaster in Haiti, mobile technology and new media is moving mainstream as a source of news and a method of collecting donations of aid. A friend's family in Haiti is on my mind today.

The BBC posted a news clip about how Twitter is being used to get information out. Mobile Active has a wealth of information on the role of mobile technology in responding to the disaster. In the United States, text HAITI to 90999 donate $10 to the Red Cross for Haiti efforts.

Public and Private Partnerships

7 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I was very lucky yesterday to spend the day exploring public art in New York City as part of Coro Leadership New York. Public art is exhibited across the city free of charge on public land, including parks and government buildings. It may be permanent or temporary, from small statues to enormous installations like the Waterfalls or The Gates.

In small teams, we interviewed government decision makers, private foundations, artists, and arts advocates for their perspectives on public art. We identified stakeholders who influence and select public art pieces, where art is placed, and what is acceptable to the community. We also considered who benefits, and possibly who may lose out. I had a chance to appreciate art in the city that I wasn't aware of, and gain insight into some of the process side of what is involved in exhibiting works of art on public property in the city.

The push for public art seems to come significantly from private donors and artists, while the government's role is to facilitate, providing access to public space with additional input from organized community groups. There doesn't seem to be a single grand vision for public art in NYC, yet there is a wealth of art on display. Even ongoing maintenance of public monuments depends on funding from private sources. Public art is a sort of democratic public/private partnership - a relationship which has its pros and cons.

The benefits of this partnership to the city and its residents are clear. The city can display an ever-changing array of free works of art while passing down a permanent installation to future generations. This improves quality of life for residents, softens and humanizes the harsh city landscape, and attracts tourist dollars, with minimal burden on taxpayers. Artists can be entrepreneurial and independent, rather than limited by the whims and preferences of politicians.

When the government is not directly funding public art, however, it is somewhat constrained in achieving broader social goals, such as ensuring that the art reaches outer boroughs, young people, and disadvantaged populations. In the absence of government authority, private money and personal relationships become key to realizing an artistic vision. There are inherent tensions between freedom of expression and service to the community, as well as between "high brow" or avant guard tastes and what appeals to the average New Yorker.

As I learn more about how government interacts with citizens, advocacy groups and other democratic organizations in New York, I'm impressed by a system that is full of contradictions: messy and seemingly inefficient yet functional; free yet not always "fair"; wide open to participation yet challenging to understand and navigate. I'm excited to learn more.

See also:

New York City Department of Parks and Recreation

On the Road Less Travelled

8 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

It's January again - the start of a new year, and now a new decade. Between celebrating the holidays and catching up with friends and family, I had some downtime to reflect on 2009. One particular highlight of the year put me back in touch with the joy of taking a chance and venturing into unfamiliar territory, and has me thinking of ways to take more risks in 2010.

Last September, I started Coro's Leadership New York program, joining a cohort of 51 New York City professionals from the public, private and nonprofit sectors to learn how to lead change for the public good. A core component of this part-time program requires participants to form self-directed subteams and plan and facilitate an "Issue Day" workshop. Each month, an Issue Day takes us across the city and into the boroughs to meet with influencers and decision makers and explore a public policy issue.

Planning my Issue Day was a definite highlight for 2009. At Coro's kickoff meeting, I signed up for the first Issue Day team available. With the smallest team and the least time to prepare, we had our work cut out for us - but the challenge was part of the attraction. I lucked into an amazing group of 5 people who were willing to pass over a laundry list of good, safer options to choose Major Depression as our public health/social services issue to explore.

We were initially surprised to see that recognizing and treating Depression was a top 10 public health priority for New York City, alongside reducing smoking and preventing HIV. We struggled to get our arms around a definition of Depression that we all agreed with, how to approach it as a public issue, and how to build and engaging and interactive day around a heavy topic. There was something about the topic that compelled us to stay with it, though, in a way the more straightforward options did not.

We debated how to accomplish two important but competing goals: drawing out honest, diverse, and potentially controversial viewpoints about mental illness while creating a safe space from stigma. What started as policy analysis expanded to involve an exercise in structuring difficult conversations that can be productive and respectful.

The day itself went smoothly and we received positive feedback from participants. But what I will remember most fondly in future years will be that our team of strangers took a chance and followed the less certain path.

So part of my goal for 2010 is to be more open to seeing opportunity in uncertainty.

A View of UX from the Balcony

9 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Unless you have a particular passion for user interface design, you may be tempted to see user experience (UX) for your software application as a low priority, particularly for an administrative enterprise system that is hidden from customers or clients.

But keep in mind that your application will have a design, and users will experience it. The only question is whether it will be a good experience or a bad experience.

Does a bad user experience matter? After all, administrative enterprise systems are serious utilities. You care about function, not what the interface looks like or whether it's fun to use.

UX is not just about an attractive interface with all the bells and whistles. A well designed system allows users to accomplish their goals efficiently and effectively. Users will get more done in less time with fewer mistakes. They will require less training and ramp-up time when new to the system, and generally be happier. They may experience less stress and burnout, and lower turnover. All this lowers costs and delivers business value.

Administrators will also provide better service to your customers and clients. Imagine checking in for a flight with a ticket agent who is struggling with a poorly designed reservations system. You will never see the interface the agent is using, but you will have a long wait in line as she painstakingly helps other customers. If the agent seems unsure of how to book your seat, and has to undo some changes, you may not trust that your seat has been confirmed correctly. If the agent misreads a confusing screen, you could wind up at the wrong gate. Its likely you won't feel confident getting on that flight (if you haven't missed it altogether!).

If you get on the balcony, you will see an airport full of people trying to reach destinations, and depending on Administrators and support systems to get there. This is true in an enterprise as well.

A solid user-centered approach to designing administrative applications will help meet the needs of all key stakeholders, and help the organization delight customers and clients. UX is more than fancy graphics. Ultimately, its about delivering business value.

What problem are you solving?

9 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Technologists love to apply their expertise to solve problems. It's motivating and satisfying to see that we've made a positive impact. This can be especially true for social sector projects, where the "impact" may be in terms of lives saved or vastly enhanced. The drive to deliver a solution can create its own issues, though, if we haven't clearly and rigorously defined the right problem to solve.

Consider the problem faced by a humanitarian organization that is designing a mobile application to facilitate AIDS testing for infants in Africa. For an infant to be tested, mothers bring their babies into local clinics for a blood sample, but analysis must be done at regional labs that have advanced equipment and specially trained staff. It takes between 6 - 12 weeks from the time a sample is taken until the local clinic receives results back. A high level process diagram quickly identifies exciting opportunities for shaving several weeks off the turnaround time by speeding delivery of data between the local clinic and lab. It is clear what needs to be done, and technically how to do it.

It's important to take a step back, however. What specific, measurable, and actionable problem does this application need to solve? Inefficiency is not always a pressing problem in itself, no matter how readily improved. There are several other possible goals a mobile solution could address, e.g., lowering overall cost of the process; providing transparency and tracking for improved decision making; or improving quality by reducing errors. If it's not possible to achieve all these goals, or if they are in conflict, how will tradeoffs be made? What is the priority? How do you know what not to do when there is so much need?

Bringing the team and stakeholders together to define a common understanding of the problem to be solved helps focus the project. It allows you to lay out success criteria and target metrics. In this case, a core problem is how to bring more mothers and their infants into the clinic. What brings some mothers in and not others? Field research may point to opportunities unrelated to the speed of getting results (and even unrelated to technology!), such as providing better information on testing schedules or availability of results to prevent unnecessary trips to the clinic, or reminding field workers to reach out to particular mothers.

For the mothers who make it to the clinic, turnaround time for results is a key issue. Without care, mortality for children born with HIV is 30% by age one and 50% by age two. With early intervention and access to retroviral medicine, survival rates increase significantly. The faster results are returned, the sooner babies can get lifesaving treatment, before their immune systems become severely impaired. For babies whose tests suggest that they are not infected, mothers can benefit from counseling on protective strategies such as exclusive breastfeeding.

By identifying the problem, we keep our focus on desired impact and outcomes, and people to be served, rather than on technical challenges.

Ashoka: Innovators for the Public are hosting Tech 4 Society, a conference exploring technology, invention and social change, in Hyderabad, India, in February 2009. Find out more about the conference here. This blog post is an entry in their competition to find the official blogger to travel to and cover the event.

Good intentions

10 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Good intentions are nice - and, like most people, I have lots of them. But translating those aspirations into real world results is not always simple. As a problem solver by nature, I'm frustrated that many social challenges seem to have achievable solutions. As a society, we clearly know how to feed, clothe, house and educate people, at the bare minimum. Yet so many people do not have even their basic needs met.

As a first step towards turning good intentions into impact, I am participating in the Leadership New York program, run by the Coro Foundation. Now in its 22nd year, LNY trains mid-career professionals from the public, private, and non-profit sectors to be change agents within their organizations and across New York City. The part time program is 9 months long, and started with an intense 4-day off-site retreat in a rural area of Connecticut in September. We also had our first "Issue Day" on Oct 21, where we examined the NYC budget process and interviewed policy makers.

LNY has me thinking about "adaptive leadership", and the need to build coalitions. As problems become more complex, solutions can also be complex. There's a need for public, private and nonprofit partners to collaborate. Building those bridges can be more challenging than moving any one group to act alone.

If you're concerned about addressing childhood obesity, for instance, you need to think about parents and their kids, of course, but also food manufacturers and vendors, schools, and physicians. You may also need to think about the availability of parks and open space for exercise, and the safety of children playing outside or walking to school. There are a lot of factors and diverse stakeholders to consider.

This is an "adaptive" leadership challenge, which requires more than technical expertise and authority to solve. You need to reach people and influence them to change the status quo.

I'm just getting started with the program, but I am already getting my eyes opened to new possibilities. To learn more about Coro, see: http://www.coro.org/site/c.nvI2IeNZJyE/b.2108577/k.EF3D/Leadership_New_York.htm

Elevator Pitch Builder Tool

11 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I found a great tool from an unlikely source. Harvard Business School has an online tool for crafting an effective elevator pitch (http://www.alumni.hbs.edu/careers/pitch/). As they say on the site, "Whether you're trying to raise capital, promote your company, or promote yourself, its essential to have an elevator pitch. You need to communicate your main message quickly to someone who doesn't even know you."

The unlikely source - Ashoka's Social Entrepreurship and Technology newsletter. But it makes sense - even when working in the public interest, you're ultimately in sales and marketing.

Intrinsic Motivation

11 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I came across an amusing story that has interesting parallels to the workplace:

"An old man lived next door to a family with several rowdy boys who played loudly outside his window every afternoon. The old man complained, begged and cajoled, but he could not get the kids to quiet down.

Finally the old man hatched a plan. He called the boys over, and told them "Look, I love to listen to you kids playing and having fun, but I'm an old man and hard of hearing. I'll give you money to play extra loud - as loud as you can - so I can hear you." The boys were thrilled, raised a huge ruckus every afternoon, and earned their reward.

After a few days, the old man said 'I'm running out of money, and I can only pay you half the old rate.' Disappointed, the kids played half as loud and quit early. When the old man stopped the payments all together, the discouraged boys refused to play at all and quietly went away. And the wise old man at last enjoyed his peace and quiet."

The story is a cautionary tale about how rewards can actually be controlling and kill natural enthusiasm. (Of course, in this case that was the old man's objective!)

Its sometimes cynically assumed that people will only do good work if they are directly rewarded with money, praise, promotion, etc. It's all about 'what's in it for me'. Rewards and recognition are important, of course. If you set an aggressive goal for a team, a potential reward can be a big incentive for them to put in extra effort. But as an optimist about human nature, I also believe most people have a desire to connect to a sense of purpose and passion. Creativity, innovation, contributions to community, mentoring, and other positive actions can have as much to do with a person's intrinsic motivation as any expectation of a payoff.

A team of CSSA volunteers recently provided Unicef with several hours of advice and expertise for a technology project to help deliver healthcare to women and children in Africa. It's been fun and rewarding to play a part in making that happen, and collaborating with colleagues as they connect with their own passions and enthusiasm. This volunteer effort keeps me connected to some of the things that keep me intrinsically motivated - giving back, problem solving, new challenges, comraderie - and helps renew my enthusiasm for my 'day job'. Its good to know that if I were working for free, I'd probably be doing something similar to what I already do at work.

Design as Business Strategy

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Last night, I had the great opportunity to hear a talk on Business Design from Duane Bray, interaction designer and head of Digital Media for prominent design firm IDEO, and Ryan Jacoby, who leads IDEO's Business Design discipline. They spoke at an Interaction Design Association (IxDA) event at Bloomberg offices in midtown to a mixed crowd of designers and business people.

Business designers adopt many of the methods and principals of traditional design thinking to generate new opportunities and innovative business models. As the internet and mobile technologies change the way people interact with products, content, services, and each other, there are new opportunities - but also new challenges to traditional ways of making money.

Design thinking builds empathy and understanding of the target customers, generates as many creative new options as possible, and prototypes new business models to quickly test, get feedback, and iterate. Business designers value close collaboration with customers, business people, designers, technologists, and others to come up with challenging but practical solutions. Like traditional designers, they also emphasize simple, compelling visual representations of their analysis over spreadsheets and detailed graphs.

In the social sector, I'm seeing more innovative "business" models from nonprofits and social entrepreneurs as they seek new ways to address social needs. This may be because I'm looking harder, or that technology has finally evolved and become more accessible and affordable to support new models (or both). Kiva.org, DonorsChoose, and other online giving marketplaces, for example, have found a valued, non-traditional role as a conduit between microfinance funders and receipients. They are facilitators of many 1:1 relationships rather than the fundraising hub and sole distributor. Many charities are also using social networking to build community and engage supporters in new ways beyond writing a check. (I am linked to Save the Children on Facebook, and get regular updates on their activities without any request for donations). The IDEO website has a free toolkit for designing for social impact, developed with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Both for-profit and non-profit organizations are in uncharted waters these days, and design thinking is ideally suited for creating, exploring, and learning by doing rather than by replicating what worked in the past. This will be an interesting space to watch.

City Releases Data for Mobile Apps

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently announced a new annual competition, "NYC Big Apps", to encourage the developers to use city data in mobile apps that benefit the public. (Thanks to James Torio for the great tip!) The city will be making available about 80 data sets from 32 city agencies and commissions, which can be used to dream up mobile applications for NYC events, property sales, recreational facilities, restaurant inspections, etc. The winners of the annual competition will receive a cash prize, dinner with the mayor and marketing opportunities.
To find out more:

New York City portal: http://nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_release&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fnyc.gov%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2009a%2Fpr294-09.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1

New York Times article: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/city-invites-software-developers-to-crunch-big-data-sets/

A Nudge in the Right Direction

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

As technologists, we often believe (hopefully correctly!) that a new technology project will benefit our end users or the organization. However, simply offering a solution and making people aware of it may not be enough for them to embrace it.

In the book "Nudge", authors Richard Thaler and Cas Sunstein argue that people do not always make the best rational choices, even in their own best interest. Decision makers are influenced by the complexity of the problem and the way choices are presented. "Choice architects" can use various techniques to structure the decision making context and influence, but not control, the outcome. Basically, an ethical choice architect offers freedom of choice to decision makers but "nudges" them in a positive direction.

Nudges are most often needed for choices where:
- benefits of action (or inaction) come now, but consequences are far in the future
- options are complex and difficult to understand
- the chooser rarely faces this type of decision, and doesn't have experience with trial and error
- the chooser is not getting good feedback on their actions or decisions (Metrics enthusiasts like to say that you can't manage what you can't measure.)
- its not clear to the chooser how one option or the other would affect him/her. Most people have little difficulty picking a flavor of ice cream, but may have some difficulty selecting off a menu of unfamiliar food

Any good business book has an acronym. Not surprisingly, a responsible "choice architect" will assist a chooser by using 'NUDGE':
- iNcentives: Reward positive choices (e.g., company match for 401(k) contributions)
- Understand mappings : Outline how various options will impact the chooser - positively or negatively - so they better determine their preferences.
- Defaults: Provide a good default option if the user does nothing. Most people will stick with the default, so the result of an 'opt-out' policy will likely be much different from an 'opt-in' approach
- Give feedback: Give feedback and warnings on successful or failed choices.
- Expect error: Expect and be forgiving of user errors. Prevent them from making predictable mistakes, if possible, and provide corrections
- Structure complex choices: Explain choices in clear language so the options are easier to compare and understand

While we want to empower business sponsors to make technology decisions, there will be cases where nudges in the right direction are appropriate (and even appreciated). Examples that come to mind are prioritizing IT security stories in an product backlog, introducing an emerging technology, or investing in architecture simplification that doesn't bring about new end-user functionality. This book outlines a helpful middle ground between giving 100% responsibility of choice to the business versus handing down an inflexible decision.

Mobile Phones for Data Gathering

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

CNN reported yesterday on the use of mobile phones and open source software to help developing countries gather information to fight infectious diseases. A field worker with a mobile phone can enter data about vaccine availability or an outbreak of symptoms, for example, and instantly inform headquarters. The article quotes some interesting statistics: Of 4 billion mobile phones, 2.2 billion are owned in the developing world. 64% of mobile phone users are in the developing world. The availability of mobile phones far outstrips computers, and even land lines.

For more information about the use of mobile technology for humanitarian goals, check out MobileActive and Open Mobile Consortium.

Redesign for Existing Sites

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Lotus Notes design - an oxymoron? Apparently not. I recently listened to a UXDesignCast podcast interview with Mary Beth Raven (User Experience Lead for Lotus Notes) and John Lance (Product Designer for Lotus Notes Calendar and Scheduling). IBM updated the design for Notes 8, and as an end user I have to agree its a big improvement. At Mary Beth's admission, Lotus Notes design had been neglected for years, and the old interface was tired and years out of date.

Introducing a new design to a very mature product with an established userbase of 140million is no easy accomplishment. The strategy for Notes 8 was clearly a 'big bang' release of a new design. Its encouraging to see that they used a user-centered design approach, complete with personas and iterative user feedback.

Jared Spool, a well known user experience designer and thought leader, discussed Amazon's contrasting approach in a very entertaining yet fact-rich podcast on UIE.com. Jared describes how Amazon evolves incrementally and subtly, and never releases a big redesign. Also 'user centered', Amazon introduces changes to small populations of its users, monitors user actions and behaviors, and iterates on the design change before releasing it more broadly. Amazon also has a huge population of existing users, and in general people hate change. Amazon is not risk averse - they take chances and accept failure as a part of the process of innovation. But changes are small and gradual. If you're interested in Amazon as a site or a business, this podcast is definitely worth a listen. Jared also goes into several reasons why you can't simply copy what Amazon does on your website due to some unique characteristics of the company, its business model, and its customers.

I don't think its possible to say one strategy is better than the other in all cases. But it is a good observation on the part of Amazon, and Jared Spool, that no one really enjoys having a site they're familiar with redesigned. Even if the design is an improvement, you're likely to hear complaints as people can't find what they're looking for, or aren't comfortable yet with the cool new features being offered. Product developers should consider options for introducing changes in smaller, digestable chunks (well suited to Agile software processes!)

One Laptop Per Child - Lessons Learned for Innovators

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

The One Laptop Per Child program is a high profile, ambitious effort to distribute 150 million laptops at $100 each to the world's disadvantaged children. By designing cheap, rugged, low-power laptops and making them available in poor communities, OLPC hopes to empower children to teach themselves and others. Despite several advantages - a worthy goal, the support of prominent business leaders and world governments, and significant press attention - OLPC has faced challenges. In practice, only a few hundred thousand laptops have been distributed, and goals have been scaled back. Communications magazine profiles some of the successes and challenges faced by this innovator. This is an important cautionary case study for innovation in general.

At a high level, here are some lessons learned for all innovators as explained in the article:

The article contains many specifics for innovators focussed on developing countries. But the lessons learned can also apply to innovations within an enterprise. Understand your users and the existing context, and anticipate potential push back even when you have the best of intentions. How does your innovation affect them and challenge them to change? Building on small, early successes, and involving your recipients in the design of the innovation may smooth the way for adoption.

Yale University recognizes a prominent social entrepreneur and McKinsey alum

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Social entrepreneurship got another boost on Monday when Yale University recognized Ashoka Founder and CEO Bill Drayton with an honorary doctorate. (Bill Drayton launched Ashoka while a consultant with McKinsey's New York office). Ashoka identifies "entrepreneurs" who have innovative, practical ideas for addressing social problems, and provides them with the financial support, professional networks, and guidance to get put their ideas into action.

The Ashoka website describes how the social sector is learning how to compete and succeed from the business world:
"We are in the midst of a rare, fundamental structural change in society: citizens and citizen groups are beginning to operate with the same entrepreneurial and competitive skill that has driven business ahead over the last three centuries. People all around the world are no longer sitting passively idle; they are beginning to see that change can happen and that they can make it happen. The result of this transformation will ultimately be a world where all individuals will be able to spot challenges, address them, and improve their lives."

Though I doubt people have been sitting passively idle until now (a bit of hyperbole), its exciting to watch this shift in mindset. People closest to a problem will often have the best ideas for solutions, and philanthropists are becoming sources of venture capital to make these ideas feasible. Its also encouraging to see business and the social sector start to speak the same language and inspire common ways of approaching problems. Many of the problems we're facing are so complex - global warming, poverty, education reform - that they really require public/private/non-profit partnerships to succeed.

Where is that food truck? Check Twitter

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Despite all the hype about Twitter, I personally haven't found much practical need for it (though it may come to me yet...). So I was pleasantly surprised and amused to stumble on an article about food trucks that are using Twitter to let their customers know where they are. Finally, something useful and fun! One of the biggest drawbacks to food carts is you never know where to find them when you need them. When you're hungry, its a lot easier to stop at a local deli, even if you're really craving a WMD ("Wafle of Mass Deliciousness") from the Wafels and Dinges truck. With Twitter, the carts can inform their followers when and where to find them, and what's new on today's menu. This deceptively simple innovation can actually make a small business more competitive.

I'm not sure how this contributes to greater social good, other than bringing hungry people and good food together. But if I stretch a little, I can see how entrepreneurs with little investment capital can take advantage of cheap, widely available technologies like Twitter and mobile phones to compete for customers. And entrepreneurship is one of the most reliable tickets out of poverty in any country.

Is User Centered Design too much of a good thing?

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Can putting people first be a bad thing? For User Centered Design (UCD) enthusiasts like myself, the UCD approach represents a movement towards making users the central focus of software design. It involves analyzing user needs and wants, and building an effective solution that is both appealing and easy to use. For me, technology is exciting precisely because of the possibilities it creates for people to work, connect, and solve problems in new and better ways.

In an article in the current issue of Interactions Magazine (published by ACM), Eric Schwikardt presents an interesting argument that UCD is inherently flawed and potentially dangerous. "Ethnographies, focus groups, cognitive modeling: Interaction design, at least, has become a process dedicated to catering to the user... It's almost a religion in our design schools, but it is in fact an incomplete philosophy that lacks a sense of responsibility for concerns other than those of the immediate end user."

He provides several examples of products (not limited to software) that are well designed from a user's perspective but have negative consequences in a larger context: SUVs that please drivers but damage the environment and put everyone else on the road at risk; kitchen gadgets that are cool and easy to operate but use no recycled materials; printer default settings for single sided copies and high resolution that waste paper and ink.

I'm still a fan of UCD, but there is a risk that should be acknowledged: In delivering the best possible "user experience" for your product, it doesn't automatically follow that you are you are maximizing the product's value for the whole community. For a consumer product, the larger community may be all of society, even the planet. In the more humble case of enterprise software, the community may secondary stakeholders who are impacted by the software but aren't direct users of it.

Security is a good example. Security requirements can degrade usability, but they are necessary to protect the organization. Another example involves common standards for user interfaces, technical architecture, etc. The standards may not be ideal for a particular set of users, but following established standards provides other benefits beyond the traditional scope of UCD.

In an enterprise, these stakeholders typically have a strong voice and influence over the outcome of a software project, so the risk of excessive attention to UCD doesn't seem as urgent. However, its a valuable exercise to look beyond the immediate end users of a software solution to examine the needs of other hidden stakeholders, and to choose your success metrics thoughtfully.

Bill Gates on the roll of technology in philanthropy

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

This article, adapted from a speech by Bill Gates, is more than a year old, but the insights remain relevant today. Technology has an important role in philanthropy, but it's important to stay humble and realistic. Underserved people and communities often face significant challenges in using technology - illiteracy, lack of electricity, inability to maintain or upgrade equipment - that may undermine the best of intentions. Its best to take the time to understand local needs, culture, and resources/limitations before providing technology solutions.

Interestingly, technology may be most important in how it impacts potential donors. By communicating the extent of the need out there and connecting people in new ways, technology can help marshall the collective action necessary to make a real dent in major social challenges.

As Gates explains:"the Gates Foundation accounts for 1 percent of the giving in America. If we spent all of our endowment on education, it would amount to just half of what the state of California spends on education each year. If we used it to fill the gap between the amount of money that's available for health in developing countries and the amount that's needed, it would barely last one year."

Link:
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/09/magazines/fortune/Gates_philanthropy.fortune/index.htm

Design that Makes a Difference

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

The theme of this year's annual World Usability Day will be "Designing for a Sustainable World". Designers are increasingly looking at product design in a more holistic way, looking at the impact of products on the natural world. As the event's website explains, "the ‘Cradle to Cradle’ approach is to start the design with the premise of using materials that can fully enter a new life cycle by either going back to nature or going back into the design process as a new product". The event is scheduled this year for November 12.

The potential of designers to address complex social issues is also the theme of an upcoming talk by Mark Rettig for the IxDA on Tuesday, March 31 entitled "How to Change Complicated Stuff (e.g., the World)"

For enterprise software, the topic of environmental impact doesn't seem immediately relevant. However, enterprise software exists in a type of ecosystem - both technical (involving all the other technologies it co-exists with) and social (the users who operate it directly and/or depend on its outcome). It should be valuable to hear ideas for designing in a way that incorporates the needs and concerns of a wider community of people who may be effected but are not necessarily directly involved in developing a product. It is also intriguing to consider approaches for designing for the full lifecycle of a product, from its introduction through its ultimate retirement and replacement.

"Social Innovation" Takes Off

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I was pleasantly surprised to find that Carnegie Mellon University has a new Institute for Social Innovation as part of the Heinz College. Hopefully, with CMU's strength in computer science and engineering, we will see some additional focus on how technology can enable and scale some of the innovations that are being explored.

The research center is a welcome complement to a similar effort at the Center for Social Innovation at the Stanford School of Business.

Mobile App Promotes Intercultural Understanding

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

CNN reports on a mobile app game developed by the US State Department and distributed via Facebook and mySpace to gamers in the middle east:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/03/06/xlife.game/index.html

Low cost laptops for kids in poor regions

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

CNN reports on the One Laptop Per Child program, which provides low cost (US$180) laptops to needy kids : http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/03/05/one.laptop.per.child/index.html

Encouraging Young Scientists

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

This past weekend I had the pleasure of judging at the New York City Science and Engineering Fair, held at City College. Students from 300 city schools displayed impressive projects across a variety of technical disciplines. With all the grim news we hear about the state of science education in the US, the event left me thankfully optimistic.

There were no exploding volcanos or potato-powered light bulbs, which is what I remember from science fairs in my day. Instead, I met kids who analyzed data from MRI machines, lab tested flammable household materials, and ran rats through mazes. The enthusiasm of the students was infectious. It was also great be in the company of area scientists and engineers who took time out of their day to encourage young people to pursue science.

Finals for the NYCSEF will be held on March 25 in the beautiful whale room of the American Museum of Natural History. About 20 students will ultimately be selected to compete in the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair (ISEF) in Reno, NV.

More About Mobile Donations

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

One of my new favorite sites, Mobile Active, posted a recent article about fundraising via mobile devices. Power-blogger Katrin Verclas covers a lot of ground in her post, which I won't reproduce here. I will, however, include a couple great links to sites that show examples of successful implementations of mobile fundraising:

Donate to a cause on your mobile phone

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Even in this recessionary environment there are exciting startups pressing forward with new uses for technology. One NYC startup worth a look is Mobile Commons, which provides mobile phone/text messaging applications for non-profits.

There are a variety of creative ways a non-profit can take advantage of mobile devices. One example is to solicit and accept donations via text message. (Mobile Commons works with the Mobile Giving Foundation to help develop the capabilities of mobile donations.)

Another use of mobile devices is to grow their contact list by inviting users at a rally or other public event to text their email address, as was done at the Save Darfur rally in NYC.

An advocacy group can use mobile devices to reach contacts about an upcoming congressional vote. Supporters who reply to a text message can listen to some background about an issue before being forwarded to the congressional switchboard to talk to their representatives.

Mobile Commons uses Ruby on Rails and develops/leverages open source software.

Nonprofits Collaborate to Solve Common Tech Problems

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

On my commute home today, I listened to a great podcast of an interview with NetHope CEO William Brindley, one of Stanford University's Social Innovation Conversations. I'm continually amazed and encouraged by organizations like NetHope that take the best resources and expertise of the private sector to empower the social sector.

Nonprofits share common problems around technology. Donors often evaluate organizations on the percentage of donations that are directly spent on programming (see www.CharityNavigator.com as an example) vs 'overhead'. As a result, many nonprofits underinvest in technology as a percentage of their revenue, and are missing out on the productivity gains that have benefited for-profit companies. Another challenge many organizations face is the need to operate globally in remote areas with limited power and communications infrastructure.

NetHope is a coordinating body that helps their 26 member organizations collaborate and share knowledge around technical challenges. It partners with top tech companies like Cisco, Microsoft, and Intel to implement solutions for common problems. A highlight is a portable, solar powered generator to power laptops and provide internet access for aid workers in disaster relief situations.

Nonprofits seem to face many familiar barriers to collaboration. Organizations that previously saw each other as competitors (for donation revenue) are seeing that they have more to gain by working together.

Collaborative, Open Source Design comes to Museums

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

The Tech Museum of Innovation in San Jose is using technology to enable designers - and the general public - to collaborate on museum exhibits. This could be a real 'game changer' for museums in a similar way that Wikipedia changed the concept of the encyclopedia and open source changed software development.

In the "Tech Virtual" online forum, anyone can propose an exhibit and work with experts and designers from around the world to help shape it. This includes refining the concept, generating content, building prototypes, etc. All ideas and materials are 'open source'. The Tech will implement the best ideas, and other museums around the world may notice and pick up on exhibits, as well. Its a new source of content for museums, and an opportunity for the general public to influence what is on display.

The Tech also invites engineers, educators, etc. to design a "Tech Challenge" for middle and high school students, which can be offered at the Tech or other local science museums. Successful challenges require student teams to work as a team to find innovative solutions to real world problems (think of the classic "drop an egg off a building without breaking it"). The deadline for 2009 online submissions just ended on Feb.16.

Wikipedia proved that an open technology platform has the power to tap into more far flung and specialized expertise than any one company could ever bring together. Tech Museum is providing a simliar advantage for museums. Open source collaboration has been a powerful driver of innovation in software development, and it could help museums keep up with the modern pace of change on limited budgets.

A case study in innovation and risk taking

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Obviously, techies are enjoying the novelty and potential of a tech saavy president. Queue magazine (ACM) published an interesting article about Obama's innovative and unique use of technology in his campaign. The author Benjamin Boer, a technical consultant to the campaign, makes a fascinating point - Obama's initial underdog status and uncertainty of funds allowed a culture of inventiveness and a willingness to experiment and distribute authority that may not otherwise have been possible. Modern technology, including social networking, open source software, and software as a service, had evolved to enable local innovation and adaptability. Its an interesting case study of how organizational culture and technology work together to support innovation.

It also makes me wonder if the current economic uncertainty might have a silver lining of encouraging risk taking and new ways of working.

The first Internet President - a good thing?

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

When Americans go to the polls, we cast our votes privately. This right to privacy is stringently, even passionately, protected as fundamental to our democracy. Technology has clearly made it much easier to ordinary people to become politically involved (see the impact of MoveOn.org as just one example). At the same time, though, even small political gestures, like a $20 donation or a e-signature on a petition, become a public act that can be referenced for years to come. I can't help wondering if all this web-based politics, for all its benefits, is undermining our right to privacy.

Barak Obama's embrace of the internet was profiled in the February issue of Communications magazine from the Association of Computing Machinery (ACM). The article was enthusiastic about Obama's ability to move beyond brochure-ware websites and connect with everyday people through email, YouTube, and social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter. By raising an unprecedented amount of money directly from small donors (assisted by online donations and email campaigns), he is supposedly less firmly in the pockets of lobbyists, big money and special interests than previous modern presidents. The article states that Obama has amassed a database of 13-million people through these channels, or 10% of the electorate. He can now reach out to them directly without depending on a 'one size fits all' national media, and get input directly from citizens rather than polsters.

It is undoubtably a good thing to have an active, engaged, empowered electorate that can communicate directly with politicians, and technology is key to enabling that. But there are few protections or rights for people who participate online. You may sign up for a mailing list just to get more information about a candidate, but once you're in a central database, you don't have the right to take back your personal information or have any control over how its used or shared. Attending a rally in person is fairly annonymous. But once you're Barak Obama's friend on MySpace, does it matter that your vote is private?

I get occassional emails from a handful of trusted organizations about issues that are up for a vote locally or nationally. With a few clicks, I can send off a customized email to my elected representatives based on my zip code, and get letters back from politicians explaining their position. Quick and easy. But unlike a phone call to a politician's office, these emails can be easily filed, searched, and shared electronically. It definitely gives me pause, and makes me wonder about the purpose of the physical curtain on the polling booth that I disappear behind when I cast my vote.

Good sites for following new developments

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

There are a lot of great online resources for social innovation and entrepreneurship, but a smaller number focus exclusively on technology in this space. Two that currently have my attention are:

NetSquared.org – A side project of the well established Tech Soup, this group helps nonprofits take advantage of new “social web” technologies. I’m particularly interested in their list of challenges, where people can submit proposals for innovative uses of technology (e.g., mobile phones, mashups) and compete for funds to get their idea going. Sponsors of recent competitions include UC Berkley, USAID, and Vodafone. See: http://www.netsquared.org/challenges

MobileActive.org – This is an online community for activists who are using mobile technology to advance social change. Its an active site with substantial, practical information about mobile technology and how its being used. There’s a 1-day event Mobile Tech 4 Social Change being held at Hunter College in February. There’s also an interesting debate about the value of cheap laptops vs. mobile devices in the developing world. Its interesting to see a debate (even rivalry?) among groups with the same social goals. See: http://mobileactive.org/olpc-versus-mobile-phone-false-dichotomy.

Capitalism and Meaning

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

I got some insight into why people connect emotionally to a brand, whether it’s a retailer, iPod or Harley Davidson, by listening to a podcast called Conscious Capitalism, from the Social Innovation Conversations Network (from Stanford University Graduate School of Business).

A panel of business and design leaders discussed how understanding and connecting to a consumer’s world view and belief system through design will be increasingly important to business success. The panelists were also concerned about how this could lead to more sustainable and socially responsible businesses in an age of surplus and consumerism.

Its worth a listen to hear these guys speak. Incidentally, the panel includes Brandon Schauer from Adaptive Path, who is well known in UX circles. He was also the instructor for a Design Strategy class I took.

The discussion left me pondering whether internal IT systems could – and should - connect to users on an emotional level. To deliver maximum value, should we be going beyond functional requirements to understand what our users value and believe in? Is this even ethical?

Younger generations of users may simply expect this from their technology. For systems that people are not compelled to use, like knowledge bases and collaborative sites, perhaps designers would benefit from tapping into value systems around sharing, helping, connecting, learning, etc.

I am also wondering if we should see our internal systems as services and experiences rather than discrete products. What would we do differently if we considered the holistic experience our applications deliver, including support and ongoing maintenance.

Listen to the podcast here: http://sic.conversationsnetwork.org/shows/detail3892.html

Welcome

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

Inspiration can come from anywhere, and sometimes from unexpected places. As an IT professional in the private sector, I am continually inspired by social entrepreneurs and others who are using technology in innovative and exciting ways to solve tough social problems.

In my opinion, social innovation is where the rubber meets the road for technology. Will a new technology change the world? Empower people in new ways? Build virtual bridges to connect people and resources? Lessen suffering and lift people out of poverty? Now that's some raw material for an amazing business case!

As technology gets cheaper, moves globally, and enters into more corners of every day lives, there are opportunities to try a fresh approach to old challenges. Many of the more successful social sector organizations have learned from the private sector in recent years, evolving to become more results-oriented, entrepreneurial, and tech saavy. In turn, the private sector can learn from the social sector, as well as contribute and provide support. And when budgets are tight, who better to learn from then the people who are experts on maximizing their impact on a shoestring and mobilizing volunteers.

In this blog, I'll be sharing my thoughts on the subject of social innovation and posting links to groups that I see advancing social goals in innovative or unexpected ways through technology. Occassionally, I stumble across a group or idea that's just plain cool, and I may blogg off topic now and again.

I welcome your comments and feedback!

Who is talking?

Archive

5 days ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

26 days ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

2 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

3 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

4 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

5 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

5 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

6 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

6 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

7 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

7 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

7 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

8 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

9 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

9 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

10 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

11 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

11 months ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation

about 1 year ago | Amy Grandov: Technology for Social Innovation