Session: Leadership Challenges: Balancing Creativity And Control

Thu, March 26, 09:00 - 10:30
2009 | Institutions

Social entrepreneurs may have comparative advantage in generating new ideas or innovations, but may struggle with execution and control. Is it possible to build innovative institutions that are around for the long haul without crowding out the charismatic element of social entrepreneurship? Can visionaries build high-performing teams, and if so how? In a climate of increased expectation around legitimacy, transparency and measurement, how can one get the balance right? Join leading practitioners and thought leaders for a candid discussion on this vitally important success factor.

 

Videos

Leadership Challenges: Balancing Creativity And Control

Social entrepreneurs may have comparative advantage in generating new ideas or innovations, but may struggle with execution and control. Is it possible to build innovative institutions that are around for the long haul without crowding out the charismatic element of social entrepreneurship? Can visionaries build high-performing teams, and if so how? In a climate of increased expectation around legitimacy, transparency and measurement, how can one get the balance right? Join leading practitioners and thought leaders for a candid discussion on this vitally important success factor.

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. I have to say the great discussions yesterday evening are still taking their toll on attendance. But we don't want to penalize people on time, such as yourselves, so we'd rather get started. My name is Maximilion Martin. I run the philanthropy services unit at UBS.

And I think we have an exciting program this morning, because we're trying to look into one of the most important tensions, I think, in any kind of organization, but in particular in the social enterprise movement; which is, on the one hand, getting creative people into the equation, empowering them, getting them to do great things; and we're lucky to have Bill Drayton from Ashoka with us this morning, who of course is really the pioneer and probably the standard bearer in this respect.

And on the other hand, the need to deliver solutions and scale, and this of course requiring some kind of accountability, control mechanisms, things that sound a bit less fun perhaps, but are equally important if you want to build resilient institutions the, our friends at school, whom I'd like to thank us, for the invitation to design the session they've put this into an evergreen session.

I think it really evergreen and that's why it needs to be treated with the appropriate care. At the same time, it is a slightly different twist on leadership because of course if we think about how do we get all of this this right people to do their work and then also go along and build institutions.

That's not so trivial, and leadership is probably the important piece to get right here. We have now I think about eighty-five minutes. The plan is the following I will briefly introduce our speakers in the order in which they speak, we have a great panel this morning, then I will provide a framework on how we should Think about leadership because you know if we wan to get it right we might as well have our definitions clear and then well hear from our analysts Their perspectives their experiences on how they manage to be effective leaders and attend both of the needs for creativity and control and get execution right at the end of the day, and then of course we're delighted to discuss with you.

That's a tall order. We have a lot we want to achieve in a short amount of time. Fortunately, we help by PowerPoint and all of you and being disciplined. I've been asked, also, to read out House keeping note should commandments number one please turn off your mobile phones. We can all accomplish that.

Second we will have a Que one day, that's the good news. But of course, it not also just requires asking questions, but also please stating them as loudly as possible because you are being recorded, so we might as well smile. At the conclusion of the session, we need to vacate the room quickly with all belongings so that staff can prepare for the next session and our friends at school asks and take the conversations which we're hopefully sparking out into the hall, and there will be a survey about the forum next week, which it will be sent to you.

And, our friends at Skoll have asked me to also reiterate how important it is to fill it in, because feedback is, of course, always essential to improve the quality of the forum every year. And that said, I have been involved with the forum since the beginning; I've attended every one of them. I've speaking regularly.

It's really wonderful to see how much it's grown, this community. So let's see what we can do with it here. Let me just introduce our speakers real quick. Well, I think I'm helped by the fact that Bill Drayton needs no introduction basically. But let me nevertheless say he is the founder and CEO of Ashoka, the largest global network of social entrepreneurs.

He started the organization 1980 and is in many ways, I think we can say, the founding father of social entrepreneurship. I don't know Bill if you enjoy being called like that because it implies a certain age, but I mean, I think the gravitas please we can certainly agree on. Today Ashoka supports over 1,800 social entrepreneurs worldwide, and last year elected 144 new ones.

He a lot about innovation and social entrepreneurs, that's something that we know. But also were delighted Bill to have you because you know about leadership. As a student at Harvard, Oxford, and Yale Law school already he was active in civil rights, founded a number of organizations such as Harvard's Ashoka table, which was disciplinary weekly forum in the social sciences.

In 2005, he was selected as one of "Americas Best Leaders" by US News and World Reports and the Center for Public Leadership at the Kennedy school. He is also the chair of Youth Venture, Community Greens, Get America Working. He's won numerous awards and honors and I have to say if I tried to even summarize all his accomplishments there wouldn't be even any time for discussion, so I will just resist.

But let me say one thing, I fully agree with Bill Clinton, who suggested in 2007 that Bill deserves the Nobel Prize. So, let's see when we will be able to celebrate all of that. Interestingly Bill's plans for leadership go far beyond himself, because one of the things that I've taken away from our interaction with showcase is Bill you have the view of everyone changemaker.

And that's a fundamentally empowering view of leaderships, because we can all be leaders in that sense and changemakers. And I'm sure we'll learn a bit more about The initiative here. It's very very to get hold of Bill because he's so much in demand so we're pleased and privileged to have you here, so thanks for joining us.

I'm pleased to also then introduce someone who, I think, was able to scale, Astella, your work, partially as a result of building work. Because sitting just next to Bill is the founder of in Mexico and a Ashoka fellow. She has been championing the cause of social inclusion for over 20 years and works on changing the way in which disability is perceived and acted upon.

I'm especially pleased to have you with us as well, because we know you very well. You were fondest in the U Ashoka social entrepreneurship awards in Mexico in 2006, and I can fully attest to your passion to create change. It's a pleasure to hear from you how you managed this challenge of being creative, at the same time creating an effective organization and being a leader.

Stella has expanded her model to many cities in Mexico. Today Unidos is present in ten out of 31 Mexican states and has reached 540,000 people belonging - which is also important, I think - to different economic, social, and ethnic groups, and for untiring efforts also has received numerous awards.

And again, I'll be very brutal here and just thank you for being here rather than summarizing your... all of your accomplishments.

We will stay in the region, just moving one chair further and one country, which is not exactly next door, but sort of in the neighborhood. And I'd like to introduce someone else from this hot bed of social innovation, which is Latin America, with a different background. You know, many social entrepreneurs struggle with scale.

We all know how hard it is to build a large organization in civil society. Sam Azout is, I think, able to provide a very interesting perspective here because of his prior experience of running a large business operation where he oversaw over 12,000 people. Samuel is currently founder and chairman of Fundacin Futbol con Corazn, which is an NGO dedicated to improving life opportunities for children and young adults, creating safe and peaceful neighborhoods in Columbia through sports.

And before that, before becoming a social entrepreneur, he was CEO of Carulla Vivero, the largest supermarket chain in Columbia. He's not only chairman of his own foundation but also an active supporter of other organizations dedicated to social inclusion and economic empowerment - for example, Fundacin Carulla, Fundacin Colombia, and also serves on the board of Fundacin Piez des Calsos, which you have probably heard of, started by the Columbian singer and celebrity Shakira.

Sam, it's a pleasure to have you with us this morning. Fantastic! We've also known each other in the past and I hope you will join us again in Cancun at our forum. I am especially delighted because we have, as you can see, a very diverse panel here with different perspectives on how...what does it really take to be an effective leader and navigate this tension.

We will now add another twist to it. And it's my pleasure to introduce Gillian Caldwell from One Sky. You know, one of the big challenges that many social entrepreneurs face is transition. Right? I mean, once you've built an organization that is fundamentally built on charisma, how do you then hand it over to the next group of leaders?

That's not trivial. You've accomplished that, so I'm sure we'll hear more about that. And you've chosen through One Sky to work on a very important challenge that we're all facing as humanity - climate change. You're working on a new national campaign in the US that advocates for bold federal action on global warming.

You're a film-maker and attorney, which I think puts you in a good position for being taped and recording this morning. I think it's very exciting to have you with us ...because ultimately I think we all agree you want to move thing in scale we need to build effective and accountable organizations, but we also need to influence public policy.

And I'm sure... Help us understand that you also knows a lot about something that came up in the panel, in the opening panel yesterday. It's useful to have a celebrity, you've worked with celebrities in your previous work, specifically with Peter Gabriel, when you were running witness. Focusing on Documented human rights abuses,you've worked with Angelina Jolie as well, who supported the organization and has traveled with you.

and in fact you have had a remarkable career, remarkable input to moving the needed in this space is exposing human rights abuses. You've lead international investigation into trafficking women and the sex trade. So I think we know you're not afraid of going into difficult issues and let's face it this topic this morning is a challenging one.

But we need to get it right because otherwise we will have a lot of xx, a lot of good ideas But will fail in the execution, so I think please give our speakers a hand here, we have a great panel. The nice thing about having a great panel is that as a moderator you hardly have to do any thing, which is which is great.

But I would like to nevertheless so that we start from a common understanding, share a few points on leadership, how we can think about it, so that we're all on the. Same page literally. I think we all agree that, many different views on what leadership is or should be we're not going to resovle all of that here in a session that would be impossible.

But I think we agree that change can't be acheived without a powerful message or vision and that that message often has to be delivered and embodied by people who exert a larger disproportion of impact. I mean, that's really leadership influencing very complex, interactive, often intangible pocesses and moving groups or institutions from one mode of interacting or being and acting it to another.

And that's hard. Interestingly, if you group all of the leadership literature, if you were, again, brutal and try to be, make it simple. There are three kinds of views on what constitutes an effective leadership strategy. The first is epic leadership. I've put them in a pyramid so you can see them.

I think that's instinctively what we all think about. we think about leaders. I mean people who have great charisma who can motivate people like us, so to speak, to get them moving, to do things that we couldn't do otherwise. That sounds good in a way, but the problem is And it's easy to understand, but the problem is leadership isn't just about the characteristics of some people who are high up there you know, I mean, Alexander the Great didn't go over the Hellis Point alone, for example.

There were a few people with him, or else he wouldn't have accomplished anything This is clearly part of the solution, the charisma, the catalytic work of the great leader, but it's hardly all of the solution. Now, a second view on leadership focuses more on in a sense a leader almost as a faceless architect of structures, of systems.

This is what we see in business most of the time. Setting up institutions incentive systems that reward behavior, of behavior through an organizational pyramid. That's what engineering leadership is all about. We see that a lot in the private sector, doesn't always work. I think we've seen that especially over the past year and a half, and are suffering from some of the consequences.

But I think we all agree that getting incentives right, building systems is very powerful influencing the lining of human behavior. And in fact industrialization, our lives here today, would not have been possible without such leadership. Businesses have become a lot more formal over the past 150 years.

This has really allowed specialization of scale and of scope. And this is probably best... embodied by people like Frederick Winslow Taylor and scientific management. Again this makes sense, right? We need system is to align behavior, but again it can't be the entire answer because we're not just robot arms, but we're not automatons, fortunately.

And there's a third strategy of leadership, which I think resonates a lot with this movement here, with social enterprise and that's the logic of what I would call enlightenment leadership. The idea that everyone, as Bill would say, everyone can be a change maker that, you know, leadership it is not something that is just exercised by some people at some kind top of a pyramid be it a military leader, or a business leader you're a politician.

Or, that it is hard coated in some kind of incentive systems and structures but really, that's an empowering message. Leadership is something in all of us and I think we've seen, over the centuries, how powerful social movements are and can be. And, that this statement is fundamentally true. I mean, people lead the environment.

They lead at all levels of an organization, sometimes more, sometimes less. But, the problem is this alone also doesn't get us anywhere, because it's great if we all lead, but at the end of the day we need institutions. Because once we can no longer lead for biological reasons, for example, or because we want to do something else, I mean it is a topic of serial social entrepreneurship for example.

Well then, you know, what remains? So we need to build institutions as well. What we want to do this morning, is to re-understand what kind of leadership strategies have been particularly effective with the our social entrepreneurs here on the panel. Who, are all extremely accomplished and who know a thing or two about how to get it right.

And how they in particular navigate this tension because everyone here has started with a great idea and multiple great ideas; it was very creative. And then started to build institutions the institutions who represent our different stages of the life cycle, I think that makes it particularly interesting and brings me to my last slide before we can go into the to the discussion.

Clearly when we think about getting the control piece right, I mean, it would be unreasonable to You can expect the same kind of approach from a starter, which can still be run fundamentally by charisma and then from a mature organization which may be the act of over fifty countries, has thousands of members or employees.

Requires different kinds of ways of aligning behavior through the engineering part so to speak. So as we here from panelists prepare for the that you might also already start thinking on your own experience experience, what has worked for you. Because, the good news is, we will have, we have planed for an extensive q and a. We want to have about twenty, thirty minutes with you and we realize this is a challenging topic because it's intersecting, you know, leadership, creativity, control.

All of these are big topics. We couldn't possibly deal with them comprehensively in an hour and a half, but we nevertheless want to take a stab at it because we feel it's important to the future of this movement, to the future of new organizations, and the good news is I think we're being helped this morning now in our discovery process with our panel, and I'd like to introduce, or invite, Phil to share his opening views.

Phil, what's your experience? What has worked for you? How have you managed to get the balance right? Thank you.


I spent 10 years at McKinsey and love the set of issues. I have to fess that up too right away. What I'm going to try and do is not only deal with specific architecture issues, but argue that we're going through the most fundamental change in society and, therefore, in the nature of what's needed of each of us individually in an organization's and if you don't understand that, we're going to be confused talking about two different types of organization.

I been helped enormously in understanding this cause over the last several months several young friends have caused me to watch a number of films about dinosaurs and specifically about a month ago, I had this fascinating two hour film about the transition dinosaur birds, and there are little mammals scurrying around trying to avoid these rather large and not very beautiful animals.

I think that's where we are. The people in this room, this conference, are the mammals, and we represent a very, very different world. Then that of the dinosaurs, which are loudly crashing around us. So, what is the history that we're dealing with here. Agriculture revolution, small surplus, only a few people could play.

So, we've had ten thousand years of elites running everything. The momentum, the thought process, the organizational structures of that world are very deep. The conventional concept of management is a few people manage everyone else and by the way that's why you come to business school in part, because of the implied promise that you get to be one of those few people who gets to manage everyone else.

Well that is absolutely a dead life form. About 3 centuries ago we broke the control of the police, starting with business and then thirty years ago with our sector, the citizen sector, we said Anyone with a better idea, if you implement it, we're going to make you real happy and we're going to copy it.

And that is generated an explosion In productivity, we've grown the surplus so in fact that everyone can be a change maker and we have also accelerated the rate of change. and actually this is a meeting that I learned this that Max organized in Italy. This guy came and he kept showing all these slides and what they showed one after another was that the rate at which change is accelerating is like arrhythmic.

It doesn't matter what country sector, the curve is logarithmic, and it's not just the rate of change, but change is coming at us from every possible dimension and combination of dimension says there are more, and more, and more individuals and groups. We're creating things. We are more and more wired together, so innovation spread further faster.

Now in that environment, The dinosaur of a few people running everything can't function. What we have to have instead Is a world of teams. You all know what this is like whether it's cricket or basketball or whatever you know you got the ball And then you got to do something with it, and that's really exciting, but you're always doing it with a team in mind.

Now what's happening is that we're living in a world of teams of teams, and literally a world of teams of teams. The boundaries become less and less clear, because the nature of being productive is that we work with others. wherever the need is. You know that's the Web is part of the nervous and circulatory system that's developing, so we as individuals have to have an extraordinary set of skills to be a part of this ballet.

We have to have mastery of very sophisticated empathy, teamwork, leadership, change making, all of which are social skills, all of which have to be learned. This world of a team of teams will work for the good. For very simple reason and that is you can't even get into this game unless you're good at empathy.

You can't, you just don't have the skills. Anyone who does not master empathy is out of the game because you're gonna hurt people and disrupt institutions no matter what technical knowledge you have. And you can't fake it. This is the fundamental skill. Well, you know empathy is sort of a that's the skill.

But, it also is who you are. So now this is a, this is a very, very different model, but it works, and so if I may, oh there they are hurry up there. The Jesuits, these two men, Loyola and Xavier created an extraordinary institution of everyone who changed maker and for 450 years it has functioned very successfully all across the globe as an integrated institution.

Now, how many citizen groups or businesses or anything else do you know who has accomplished that? Think about the people you know who are or once were Jesuits. They somehow let you know within the first 4-8 paragraphs, "Oh, I was a Jesuit." And you see people who are Jesuits all over the world, they are very remarkable people.


Something about this organization is right. It attracts and it helps people be very powerful. You're supposed, as a Jesuit, to do the best you possibly can and the expectations that you can are very high both in works and faith. And the exercise is: step back. Are you really accomplishing big things?

Are you being drawn down into the muck of daily behavior? And are you doing it in love? well that's a very strong statement of a system based on empathetic skills; it uses much less good word analytically useful. Think about Google and Silicon Valley, and compare it to Detroit and Milwaukee and so on.

What do you have that is working there? It's a collection of people who are change makers, who like doing change, who feel they can do change, and they work together in and across organizational lines, and they're inventing ways of doing that. The same thing is true with Bangalor versus Calcutta. Now you stop and think about it, it's very clear what works and what doesn't work.

We know who the mammals are and who the dinosaurs are. We were asked to share a little bit about our own struggles Ashoka has to be, absolutely has to be in every one, an entrepreneurial organization. And defining it broadly: the two thousand six hundred fellows, the members, the staff, the support networks, the entrepreneurs, the business entrepreneurs, who are partners, our many other partners, you know, Skoll, Sayeed.

It's an intentionally open architecture, change makers is another part of that. So, that's part of the architecture right from the beginning. We try to draw people in, very carefully. Both as fellows and staff who are mammals, who our entrepreneurs who have very strong ethical fiber. We take that very seriously.

Then we try to create an environment that is fitted for this type of person. So you can choose a staff to have 100% comp time. Which means basically for people who like what they are doing they can take time whenever they want which is appropriate for someone who's an entrepreneur. You want to start your own idea as long as it meets a high standard you don't have to move your desk.

You can just do that within. Building processes that are, you know, a democratic system is then is actually very sophisticated. It's much more sophisticated than the earlier organizational form, so we've developed processes that give people the power to be powerful to make major historic contributions that really work, and that draw out the strength of the community.

So, you elect fellows, the best entrepreneurs we can find, regardless of subject. You got a couple of hundred. You see a pattern in a field. Okay this field is ripe. Two hundred people who bet their lives that they can change this field. Alright so what are the patterns that you can see, and once you start seeing the patterns, which are the one, two, three that are really historic for the field and for moving the world from smaller leads Everyone a change maker.

They are also a big win for the key people in the field and that we can see the forest, move society there. Once you get that then we start something that's really very new in the world and we're frankly still learning how to do this but we're far along in a couple of cases which is working together.

Collaborative entrepreneurship to tip the world with those principles. Any child that doesn't master empathy is out of the game. They are just going to be marginalized. and that will increase rapidly. So, schools don't think about that. We'd like to change that. If we can get two to three three percent of the influential schools in seven to ten countries, we could tip the world, we have to get some of the key intellectual leaders in those countries as well.

Well, we're working together. We know who those people are. We know those institutions. We know how to work this. So, we can do that. Now, this is a very new thing, but in terms building an institution. This is a process that brings us together, doing what we like to do, which has caused change, which is exactly what the historical moment requires, and so that's part of the architecture as well.

The final point is, this is when I was trying to understand the Jesuits earlier, a former Jesuit... I was of course... my Mackenzie background is looking at organizational forms and whatnot, and so you've left something out, it's faith. Yes, that seems like a pretty basic point. Every organization that's really viable has to know what it's doing, what it's vision is and for us it's building and everyone a change maker world.

Its ending the rule of the elites and that is a very big... this is the biggest change in history since the agricultural revolution. It's very motivating. Alright so now, that's what works. I've had to be brief on that. Let me just raise a few risks. One big risk is the idea that safety is in stasis.

No, absolutely wrong. The Fortune 500, where are they? If you look for those that were there twenty or thirty years ago, most of them are no longer in that list, but the Jesuits are doing very well thank you. Now, what's the contrast? You build an organization where everyone is a brilliant change maker, and they are treated properly and have the right ways of working together.

Then you have a permanent organization. Stasis is where the risk is, not where the safety is, and I would add that we need to build organizations to look for the big changes not the peripheral little ones. When you're after the next quarterly report it's the little ones that you're after but it's the institutions that are looking for the big s-curves changes that really are.

Okay, another, this is one that really irritates me, I've always fess up to you right away. And here you can hear the dinosaurs telling you what to do which is you know right away this is wrong. Oh, It's time for the entrepreneur to give way to the managers, and you hear the rhinoceros beat of the dinosaurs rushing at you this is ridiculous.

If you're causing major change, it's not having an idea and going and implementing it, it's a constant process of change. The faster you go up that curve the more that's true., You need to have everyone, not just one or two people managing, you need everyone to be as much an entrepreneur is possible.

That's what a successful organization is and increasingly will be. Bring in the managers please. For those people here who are social investors, there is no safety in trying to control the modern mammalian organization. that is a really bad idea. The best, safest investment is when you invest in an everyone a change maker organization.

That is the Organization that will really bring results, and don't try to be a vehicle for bringing in, for example, this idea Got to have managers or you've got to have this very old fashioned evaluation which is really backward-looking and control-oriented not helpful. So, finally, don't listen to dinosaurs that keep telling you that you can't.

They tell you that individually. They want us to be like them, but it doesn't work. We're not like them. Thank God. The only thing that's worse is marrying one, this really, really doesn't work. There is a fundamental, you know we Max mentioned the Alexander at the hell spot. Well, think about Alexander in front of Persepolis.

You know, here he was, very far away from main base, small army, and Darius had swept the plains so there were no boulders that would upset his chariots and all these elephants. But, at the end of the day, he was fleeing towards Afghanistan, and this was a confrontation basically, between an army that was not good a phalanx fighting and one that was.

It was an organizational change.

You know, those rectangular porcupines that the Greeks had just made mincemeat of the Persians. Well, the phalanx is a very primitive form of organization compared to the team. Let alone teams of teams. And, you cannot put a phalanx spear carrier in a team. It doesn't work. This is a very rich ballet.

You need a different set of skills. We just have to understand that at every level, we're going through the most fundamental change in the nature of organization, because the world is going through this fundamental change, and so, please don't mix up mammals and dinosaurs when worrying about centrality or not.

Thank you. Bill, thank you very much for sharing This powerful vision. I think, you know, marriage is between mammals and dinosaurs already from a space point of view. I wouldn't want to organize the wedding party I guess it might be hard. I think you've given us a lot of food for thought. This is a powerful vision, I would say at the meta level, at the uber level, so to speak.

The world is changing quickly. We need to think very carefully which of these changes matters, which are the big ones, and how we need to organize ourselves to confront them to be able to use them productively. Let's now take a slightly different perspective and hear how does this actually work out at the level of social entrepreneurial organization.

And I'm very pleased Estella that you've agreed to really take us a bit through your experience because you started in 1987 and you know you've managed a very resilient organization that has touched over 500 thousand people's lives, so help us understand what work for you and how does this relate?

Perhaps this whole thing is a build up. Thank you.

Good morning. Thank you very much. It's an honor for be here. I remember an occasion when my family was in a Park and another parent ordered his children to come back where my family was sitting. I remember yes well that friend at that time who seem uneasy come into my house. The organization I represent It was my solution to the rejection experiences by two of my siblings, both whom are people with disabilities.

In Mexico, a county with more than ten million people with disabilities, discrimination and exclusion has every day experiences. What need to do is integrate people without and with disabilities in social settings so that some changes can be made in the attitude of society. On the other hand this has started to help disabled people to educating people who are not disabled.

It's a different kind of model. Rather by helping the suffering, we are trying to focus on those who are suffering something great. Over the last twenty-two years They have experienced difficulties as a social entrepreneur which I am going to refer as a tension. By tensions, what I mean is conflictive Forces that we need to manage and to administrate in our organization.

I will talk about the type of little sheep by looking at how my approach has changed over the twenty years. Okay. I still remember when i went to visit my first diner 20 years ago. By this time my family support was not sufficient the question is. Who do you represent? Simply an idea A minor for woman of twenty years who wanted to change society was not sufficient to give me ideas.

Tension naturally arises between the solitary work of the social entrepreneur and the sincere work a decision making group shows a word of the right person quiet often it becomes above the much more powerful than the singular entrepreneur. And accepting this is difficult for us. Our history is to share our dream but share the decision making it's a more difficult step.

My role in this type of leadership. is more. Set the basis and involved ten members that have higher predominance in generic style Sometimes these more difficult because I felt that I might loose control and idea could be overpowered by the Bureaucracy. With a word, I quickly realized that decision making was now invested in another group in contrast to before where I might do it, myself, over a cup of coffee or while I took a shower.

I remember the time when the president from our board of directors was calling me for not respecting board decisions. Quite rightly he said, the advisory board served no value, if I continue to make decision what might hurt and without them. Tension between. We have a second tension. Between involvement or not involvement in structures.

In my experience, we social entrepreneurs, we give you time when structures are created. This ironically creates the situation where we allow the creation of structures to be permanent to our idea, our institution, but, we rebel against those structures.

Sometimes social entrepreneurs get bored with the day-to-day. We prefer to think about innovation for the future. We ignore the present, which is really important.

In the present we need to release control to a structure that we created. It is for the future that we need to keep innovating.

This is a new game that the social entrepreneur has to play, institutionalized and a low contract to be given to a structure organ is so that we can move on the other challenges in the organization, and not lose our creativity. That's why we find another attention. Attention number 3. Attention between inspirational and entrepreneurial Two important features that founders provide to their organizations are unity and commitment.

Both of them are intangible it is from this perspective that the concept of spirit and body of the organization gets validity. This pretty is tangible things entity and the body is organization structures. Social entrepreneurs to infect each person that works along side them with this spirit. However, just letting the philosophical of the organization into tangible artifact is a unique work of the entrepreneur.

But how do you decipher mystique and charisma the organization. For example, in a part of our philosophy is to try to eliminate the stereotypes that affect how disabled but before I integrate into life. Even at world level, applies this philosophy. We use as my face, sees the root of our philosophies declaration of happiness.

It is here where I want to talk of scaling. I base my tactics on this. If the mystique of the organization is not included in tangible elements, then the scaling will not reproduce the philosophy. It will only be reproducing the structural elements of the organization without the soul and perhaps, limits the life of the idea.

In this tension, the entrepreneur needs to wear two hats. Knowing when to provide inspiration and when to move away and be creative. In summary, I have used a combination of epic and alignment leadership. I have involved others with an engineering style. In key positions a moment to let the needles adapt to changes and continue it's growth toward the dream we share.

to conclude, I want to look at some of the briefs if ignoring the extensions.

Number 1: Association entrepreneur Colby Jones as effective only for starting the idea and not just useful for developing and expanding it. Number 2: The spiritual role of the social entrepreneur and the mystical element of the organizations seems to be invisible and such might not be taken seriously and given value.

Number 3: If social entrepreneur release complete control of their idea to a governing body, they will find themselves in an organization that is much different than their original idea. Number 4: When the social entrepreneur feels that only he is in tune with a dream he doesn't understand, that now his or her dream is a way of life of many more people.

These people are able to spread believe me this station really back to widely definition idea ...original plan. I didn't just want to change an unfair war for my siblings. I wanted to create an enduring change for all. Thank you. Estella, thank you very much. I think we're all very inspired by your work and its interesting to see that so far we've sort of proponent of everything is changing.

In a sense, the everyone a change maker vision, that's the future. You were saying there is a combination of epic and enlightenment And of course, I am tempted to hear now from Sammy. I'm sure Bill hasn't accused you or business in general of being a dinosaur, but ...you know, what about execution.

What is the execution, please? So tell me I'm delighted to hear from you, your perspective on how to... you have to catalyze effective leadership and addressing these tensions.

Well thank you Max and beunos dias. Good morning. I bring greetings to all of you from my beautiful country of Colombia. It is really a privilege to be here in such a distinguished session. Of course with Bill and Max and Estela and Gillian it has been quite an honor for me. You know, social entrepreneurs, we want to create organizations that have scale, that have a high impact in our communities.

And we want these organizations to be sustainable. And this is what we are always after. Now in Columbia I look after an organization called Futbol Con Corazon which translates into Soccer With a Heart. And we go into these very poor communities, where the is plenty of crime and violence, and use soccer to change the attitudes and the behavior of the young children and the adults.

So So this is basically what we try to do. Of course, we understand that all forms of leadership that Max has described epic enlightenment and engineering leadership are all present in organizations. But we tend to favor engineering leadership. We favor these elements in Algerian leadership: having focus, having professional management, having efficient operational processes and having a very clear growth strategy.

Now let's return to each and every one of these. The first one is focus. We want to understand what is the uniqueness of the organization. What makes the organization have a real differentiating value? What makes the organization be dramatically different? What is the superior purpose of the organization?

And the ultimate goal is to have that mission in 10 words or less and it becomes a very powerful, motivating element. Secondly, this is our problem. In Colombia we have millions of children. In fact in other places in Latin America as well, and in other countries, like Pablo. Pablo has a lot of lack of mentors.

He has too much free time on his hands. He is exposed to a lot of intra-family violence. He does not have extracurricular activities or after school programs. And then, with all this free time, he is exposed to drugs, to alcohol, to risky sexual behavior, to crime, to participating in gangs, and to having recruitment by illegal forces in Columbia, both the para-military forces, which do recruitment in the less fortunate neighborhoods.

And also from the guerrillas, they also do recruitment for illegal forces. So 85 percent of the crimes of violence in Colombia comes from these neighborhoods where Pablo and Maria and millions of kids are out they're being exposed to these risks. So our mission is to bring Soccer For Peace to these troubled neighborhoods.

And change the attitudes, the behavior, and the values of these children and their families. And Soccer for Peace is a methodology that includes playing soccer of course, but with different rules. In Soccer For Peace boys and girls play together, in the same team. In Soccer for Peace the first goal of each team must be scored by a girl.

Otherwise it will not count. So we treat gender issues. In Soccer for Peace the children, and the young adults, play without a referee. They learn from a young age to solve their own conflicts, by themselves. In Soccer for Peace, the children have meetings before the game, where they establish the rules of coexistence.

how would they behave in the soccer field? And then after the game is played, these children meet again and they evaluate if their behavior was according to what was established in the meeting before the game. And at the end of the game, the winner of these Soccer for Peace games is not the team that scores the most goals but a combination of goals scored and the application of these coexistance rules which are based on the values of tolerance, solidarity, respect and honesty.

Now the second element of this, what we call engineering leadership where Max has instructed about engineering leadership is creating a team. First, we have a corporate governance. We have a board of directors, which is second to none in a social organization. Is your board of directors composed of... imagine having a board of directors composed of Max and Bill and [xx].

This is the type of board of directors we'd like to have. So we make a huge effort to have the right corporate governance. And you're all welcome to our board, if you ever have the time. So we have the right corporate governance with the professionalism that is needed to create this social enterprise and then we have a team.

But we make sure that when we recruit our team, that first they have empathy, as Bill has suggested that every single member of our team has empathy, that they are committed, that they are disciplined, that they are accountable, that they are proactive. That they are enthusiastic, that they are organized, and they are willing to work together and we find this to be a very important element, having the right people.

I don't know if you all remember, this is Andres Escobar. Andres Escobar played the World Cup in 1994 and the game Columbia with the US and Andres Escobar, a terrific young man, a real gentleman on the field out of the field. He scored his own goal. So he scored a goal against his own team. And of course, we lost that game against the US and we had to leave the championship because we were disqualified.

And so, the team came back to Columbia, and after coming back a few days later Andreas was assassinated. He was assassinated by the Columbian mafia. And so this sparked a looking to soccer and football and see what we can do in terms of bringing in new ideas. To look at soccer as an element to build communities, not to destroy communities.

And this is when soccer for Peace was invented. It was invented in the city Medellin of by two great individuals, Augustine Ortiz and Alejandro Arenas. And these to individuals created this soccer for peace. And they saved thousands of lives in these slums in Medellin, by implementing soccer for peace, where the gangs played compete against each other in Soccer for Peace.

Now the third element is the processes. We have identified in football [xx] and soccer with a heart, four processes were very important. The first one is the building of the fields and the community centres which we build in every single community where we establish our project. We also have very strict processes in implementing Soccer for Peace.

Our instructors go through a process and a workshop where they are certified as instuctors in Soccer for Peace. Then we have the workshops with the parents and with the children and the leadership clubs and everything that goes around in these very interesting workshops. And finally we have nutrition.

The nutrition we don't do directly. We outsource because we're focused Soccer for Peace. And we have a special organization that does the nutrition and is our partner. So we spend a lot of time documenting these processes very well. So we can later, as we are doing now, and as we scale the project.

It is like a cookie cutter. Once you have these processes documented, and once you have these processes in place for the people that are trained, you can expand almost indefinitely. Now, the other element, the final element I have to present today is a strategy for growth. So, this is based on three pillars.

The first pillar is partnerships. We don't want a huge amount of partners. But we want very good partners. So for example we have partnered with Jacob's foundataion. A terrific foundation based in Switzerland. Who is helping us scale the project. We have partnered with the Presidency of Columbia, through the program for the illeagal ex-combatants.

So we work very directly with the President of Columbia and his agencies. And also we have partnered with other organizations such as MBAs Without Borders. They send professionals to help us, help us in evaluating our business plan and moving forward secondly we will get in subsidy program we implement a sort of a peace but identified any problems will be rise in summary processes in high income neighborhoods.

And these children pay a fee for participating in Soccer for Peace. And then for every child in a high income area that participates, we are Able to finance three children in the low income neighborhoods and finally we do massive fundraising, we have sponsor a child program, we have programs for.

companies, for small, medium and large companies. So we do massive fund raising as well. Now we certainly believe that these the ideas are out there. There are plenty of ideas. There's a lot of creativity, but I personally favor taking these ideas and executing them properly because a lot of ideas get lost in the middle because they are not executed properly.

And if we favor Engineering leadership without an understanding about epic enlightenment leadership are also very important we favor these type of institutionalizations through right processes, through the right people, through the right corporate governments, through the right strategies Especially for girls, through the impeccable and clear focus in mission we're able to achieve this balance we've always wanted.

between creativity and control. Muchos gracias. Sammy, thank you very much. You know, I can see we're really setting the stage here for debate, which is fantastic, and thanks for your the inspiring work that you do. I lived in for a while, and I have to say it's extremely important what you doing, and we're all very pleased and proud that you're doing this.

i think this one ingredient that was missing in this debate so and its for the in the sense between because so far we have seen that you know, and probably slightly different views, but we've looked at challenges in a sense territorial in nature. In both cases with Stella and Sammy, you have communities that have certain challanges and that one can deal with almost in a modular way.

Now, the problem is, many of the challenges that we face as global community are territorial because they affect everyone, such as climate change, for example. So, how do we play there, I mean, when we work on really large scale macro challenges that affect everyone? Julian, please help us understand this.

So, when my father asked me, you know, why I was going to England, I said, "Oh, you know, Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship," and I said, "Presenting on a panel on creativity and control." He said, "That's a good panel for you, particularly the control part." And I felt like saying, "Well, if that's not the pot calling the kettle black!" And then I thought about my mother who owned an art gallery and - I lived in the back of an art gallery as I grew up - and I thought well....

the apple didn't fall from that tree, either. And so, as I thought about Max's design for leadership and Max's thoughts on it, I realize that I'm very much a hybrid of all three methods. And I think there is a lot of strength in all of the elements. Epic leadership, you know, inspirational, charismatic, empowered vision, engineered leadership, which really is about designing effective systems and capacities not just to implement vision and strategy but also to ensure that epic leadership is enable to continue innovate.

And as Bill has suggested, enlightened leadership. Because in fact we need an everyone change maker world we need to empower and enable everyone change maker world. So in fact we have here, are represented four distinct perspectives on leadership with mine I think being all three combined. Bill talking about enlightening and you talking about engineering, and you picking two of the three.

It's quite Interesting. I as max suggested, I am what they call a serial social entrepreneur I am on my third enterprise in 15 years. I was awarded the Skoal award for the worr I did with Witness, which empowers and enables human rights groups around the world to use video to create change and systemic social impact, and Witness's new executive director, Evette is here.

Raise your hand Evette. So we'll talk a little bit about transition as Max asked me to and I'm now running a new national campaign in the United States called One Sky which is a highly collaborative enlightenment model campaign to empower and enable a grassroots movement across the country to pass Federal Legislation in the United States to put a cap on global warming pollution and tackle what I think is the defining challenge of our generation, which is climate change.

But I thought, just a little bit first, about want I've come to understand as the six really essential ingredients to success, the success of a project or a campaign or an organization. And I think that they are the same essential elements. And the first as everybody's eluded to is a very clear and compelling vision.

That's absolutely critical. The second is a strategy and a plan, people talked about that as well. A vision without a strategy is a hallucination. The third is the team. Bill eluded to this. How do you build a powerful enabled team of people. Staff, board, advisers around you. Where is the talent?

And I think this is the single greatest challenge that we face as social entrepreneurs to identify that talent and to surround and enable it around us. The forth ofcourse is a system for evaluating your impact. If you don't have a way of understanding and measuring the progress your making and reevaluating, and if you don't have a willingness to fail, I think you're not gonna get where you need to go.

So, it's the process of continued evaluation and reevaluation with respect to your strategic imperatives. Particularly in the context once we moved to a rapid response mode in campaign deployment this year in the United States because we are literally the with congressional regulatory and activity at the administrative level it is extremely busy when it comes to energy powers in the U.S. after a long and deathly period of silence.

And I mean, that literally, the fifth element that I think is so critical is a deep emphasis on relationships. And Bill eluded to this, the importance of empathy by relationships I mean not just the internal relationships within an organization but the relationships external. If you don't pay attention to nourishing and cultivating and building and sustaining relationships, you cannot succeed, and that is true at every level in your life.

so i think relationships are absolutely credible and deciding a system at an organizational level to empower and enable the development and the sustenance of those relationships is critical, and related to that is the outreach that you do. How do you communicate your vision, your strategy, your plan, and your opportunity for others to engage.

Very connected To relationships. And finally go to my friend who loves engineering. A system for information management and institutions You have to find a way to capture, and manage, and organize the information and the learning and the relationships. The opportunities that your organization is surfacing and I think that's one of the most critical requirements for inspired leadership and it's a place where.

A lot of so called charismatic leaders tend to ignore that dimension where is the institutional. Where's the system for husbanding and coordinating that information and ensuring that it sustains itself as an organization. Extremely critical. So I mention six, I did not mention money. In my experience if you all of those things money follows, so I think that is a natural evolutionary result of those other elements.

Max asked me to talk about engineering leadership to move on. And, as you might guess I believe that doing the six things I just mentioned is absolutely critical to lay the ground work to be able to move on. So that's where I focused my energy in all six of those areas as I prepared to move on and to pass the reign There's a couple of obvious infrastructural dimensions of course.

it was really important that i had a fantastic Deputy Director at Witness when i chose to leave, who was able to serve as an acting Executive Director during the period of the search. It wouldn't have been Wouldn't have left if it weren't for her. Couldn't have left. It's also critical, of course, to build, and Bill talked about this, a team.

I had a senior team who had Authority on autonomy and capacity in each of the key elements of the organization. I had built a strong financial base so there was more than Year of operating support in the bank and there were several renewable grants that were already in the pipeline, and i had been very clear with the donors.

That had supported our work. That it was not about me. That is was about the team. And the system and web of relationships and the model that we had built. And i think they believed that, as was evidenced by the fact several grants actually increased following my departure at the request and suggestion of my team They were glad to see me go.

Then of course, you know, having a strong board in staff, a committee to enable the transaction was critical. And I think staff participation in that committee to identify the characteristics they were looking for in leadership and to help define and select new leadership was really important.

After a global search they wound up with Evette, who was actually somebody ahead recruited for the board. So, they convinced themselves that she was, indeed, the best and only person for that job. And I think the last and most important element to transitioning leadership is letting go and that is something that I haven't written the book on yet.

It's hard, hard to do that. Max also asked me to talk about, you know a war story when it comes to creativity and control. And I thought I'd mention the Hub. she is a sort of a you tube for human rights which we developed a witness just before I left in fact i finally got it of the ground literally the day before I walked out the door.

And it was extremely challenging because it was basically a vision of how you can enable a platform like You tube for people to upload content of human rights violation from anywhere around the world. Enable them to connect to a system, a community ; an advocacy driven opportunities to make a change around that material raises lots of issues regarding veracity, and security, and lot of complexity; To the concept.

But it was something that the board and I cooked up in conversation which was very unusual for Witness. People talk about of the problem that boards can control you. Every board that I've ever designed has been one that has empowered and enabled the leadership that we were building. In fact, while they've approved the budget I've never given them the opportunity to approve the plan interestingly, I think that may be quite different than a lot of other boards but I have provided the plan for input and many of them have been involved in developing the plan but the plan is explanation of the budget.

So they understand what they are investing in, and they have an opportunity to adjust and redefine it, but they don't write the plan and they don't officially approve the plan. So that may be a distinction a way in which I tried to carve out an opportunity for significant authority at the staff level which is I think is where a lot of the really deep comprehension arised.

So, anyway, in this case, with the Hub, I came back to the team with absolute clarity that we had to do the Hub. I mean, we had talked about at the board level. It was obviously the time was now to move from a model where we were donating video cameras to human rights groups and then enabling them to document violations to taking advantage of web 2.0 in a global operation of cell phone cameras.

It was so obvious to us. And I came back to the team with this, "this is what we're going to do" and there was practically an uprising. Because of the complexity, because of our obligation too ensure the veracity, and the credibility, and the safety of the people we were working with; and so I had to step way back and talk about creativity and control.

They didn't like this notion that I would have come to some vision and agreement with the board, and then brought it to them on a silver platter. And so it all happened super quickly, so I had to step way back, and spend the next six to nine month in a process, a very involved process, with the team bringing in key outsiders and really examining the assumptions and coming up to a model and developing a degree of buy in.

That was for sure a war story, and it slowed things down, but in my opinion, if I had just shoved it down their throats we wouldn't have gotten where we needed to go, which was to get it off the ground in a way that they felt empowered and enabled by.

I want to allow time for questions and we're running super late the only last question that Max asked me to tackle was, you know, in this economy more creativity or more control and as per our speaker last night in the Sheldonian I choose neither. I believe that there will be both more creativity and more control in context Of this economic environment that we're in.

More creativity because people have to think outside the box, as they always have, about how they're going to bring the resources to bear get the work done, whether it's more earned income revenue, whether it's deeper partnership, which I think is really important. And I hope that this enables deeper about our thinking about partnership, and more control in the sense that I think we have to be much more rigorous about we spend our money.

And the last thing I'm going to do, just before I Because we talk about enlightenment leadership, is give you an actual example of One Sky and what we mean by enlightenment leadership there. Basically what we're doing With the campaign as we have 435 allied organizations. We have organizers in 20 states around the country.

We are empowering and enabling volunteer climate precinct. captains in every congressional district in the county. And we're doing this in an online to offline organizing model, somewhat similar to what what the Obama campaign designed. So basically, we launched this just in February and we've already got all of these climate precinct captains in the last month; people who have raised their hand and said, "I will be a volunteer organizer for this campaign." I will organize my community, I will educate my elected representatives, and I will work with you, to get opinion editorials and letters to the media to help frame this debate in key Additional districts.

So we have 47 states and 220 congressional districts organized through this online tool which enables you a lot of opportunity to manage and organize your district, in essence. So, that's all for me. Jillian, thank you very much You know, I think we're all extremely inspired The challenge is exactly what you said.

In addition to the all content pieces how do we allow for discussion right now. we have 15 minutes, it's very simple. a question ends with a question mark not with exclamation mark so I, we don't really want to hear I mean a great if you talk about could you Things but ask these precise questions to our speakers.

We will do a round of 3 questions and we'll see if we can get through them. Obviously, the same applies to us, we also have to be briefed. And then maybe we can do a second round. If not we have to do that in the break, outside. Yes? Jill Wyles Sports for Kids. I can't help myself. Bill when you say don't bring in the managers, do you Oh Thanks.

That several of my managements teams hair caught caught on fire. And so we found it very important to bring in people with functional expertise around HR, management, IT.

So are you Opposed to managers who are sort of entrepreneurial managers or just all managers in general. Okay well that is a great question. Will collect two more questions and will tackle it. Yes.

Since every organization starts to an idea but then as many of you demonstrate needs to become very clear very solid and very to easy to explain I am curious about how each of you work from the network of interesting and enticing possibilities and really narrowed down to that one thing you can think galvanize an organization around.


Okay, good next question. Yes you have one over there. Okay.

I didn't. I want your comments, I didn't hear much of how information modifies execution control. Inspires and sustains an organization, and at the end of the day gives you the results you all want.
Thank you very much. I think we will tackle this round so 3 questions. One to Bill directly. Are you post managers in general yes, or no.

I think it is more complicated than that. Second, I think the second question should be about focus. How do you move from a vast web of ideas and possibilities to focusing on one and then executing them. The third is really about the feedback loop; I mean, how do you make sure that as you learn more about what happens and what you do, that you adjust execution.

I think Bill, you probably have to start because that question seems very urgent and burning, and then afterwards I would suggest that we go through and you take them in the order that you like. When your hair is on fire you have to do something about it clearly. I just think its much easier for entrepreneurs to learn to be managers than to try and get people who are not entrepreneurs, who will never understand our type of organization, to fit in.

Then you have a conflict this is the marrying, or the Dionysus problem. And so I'm not against management; ten years at McKenzie, I promise you. I actually think it's really important. And of course you have to have systems. I didn't want to imply, not at all. It's just a different type of system.

And in fact one of the things, going to your question, you have to do is listen, systematically listen, and constantly be changing not just the answers but the supporting systems, the culture, the people. And it's just, if you are a mammal, if you really like change, you're good at this ballet, you have the ethical fiber, the empathy, the team work skills then you learn the rest.

If you don't have that, that's where the problem is. Ok, I think that management is very important. I studied ambition and then as a social interpreter I need to study MBA to know more about business. But, I am convinced that we have to involve people with the expertise in business, in structures systematic, and you need to release control in those people, and you need to work in inspirational.

Irina, You need to fight with two hats. With the hat of expertise and they had to rational but to recognize which is our limit and to involve people with that expertise and to compliment your skills. It is my opinion.

Well there are 3 questions on the management front, I'd agree will Bill that you would. On a need people with that kind of innovation and entrepreneurial spirit. But as I suggested I think the single greatest challenge I've faced and many of my peers have faced is and talent, getting the right talent, finding people who are smart, strategic, creative, well organized, and efficient.

I'm honestly less and less interested in management as I get more and more experienced with it. So I'm at the point where I'll manage people who are like that and no one else. Because it's too much of my time. It's exhausting, really. But at the same time you can't have enabled team leadership if you don't trust the people surrounding you.

So it's absolutely critical that you have people that, you know, have all of those capabilities and that you trust to innovate and to lead. I don't think you can do a scale at any level without that.

There was a question about information and how information informs change, and that's what I was talking about when I talked about the need for systematic evaluation. I mean, you need to be understanding your model and listening to and understanding its impacts so that you can make mid-course corrections.

And in situations where an element of the model is falling, you need to figure out why and, you know, fix it or ditch it. So I think that that whole evolutionary dimension is really, really critical. And then there was this question about how you decide which idea makes sense. And my feeling is that I didn't ever make any decisions.

I mean, basically I had to do what I found myself doing.


There is a degree of gravitational force which brings me you to a particular moment in time and requires me to serve and to lead on that issue. And so if you look at my own trajectory from an under cover investigation on the Russian mafia to witness to climate change. You say, "Well, she's schizophrenic, what does she really care about?" And the reality is that I care about--I see a particular opportunity at a particular moment in time to make a system-wide difference.

And I enable a particular model in theory of change in whatever I do which is about dis-enlightenment dimension. How are you How do you empower and enable other people to make a difference through collaboration and partnership and through your campaign design? So those for me are the consistent narrative threads, and I think if you get too analytical about what it is that you want to do and why, you're missing, you know, the passion, you know, which is the life blood of the energy you bring to it.

Well, I agree with Jill. We need functional expertise. But, in a way, I don't think there is a choice between function expertise and change agents. I know many managers that are experts in their functions, and they're still change agents. So I guess what I'm trying to say is like last night, in the spirit of last night, it's not really that much choices.

We can have both. We can have change-makers and experts at the same time. Now in terms of deciding on the idea, I go back to William Ury's book "The Power of a Positive No." Some of you have read it. William Ury says that in life one has to say no good things, to do what is your real fundemental yes.

So, when one is engaged in all these social [xx] ideas. And, you know, you have the fat of the day and people coming up with great ideas. It's important to be consistent with a vision. And you must say know sometimes the good ideas. Just to be able to implement your own fundamental idea for change.

In terms of the question on how can we insist on engineering leadership when we need the passion, we need the inspirations, we need the vision. We also need the enlightenment and the empowerment. About choice. Which must have all these types of leadership models inside organizations. They're all very helpful.

But, i have seen through out of the years. That when good ideas are not accompanied by organized systematic methodological, and sort of systems behind all these many of these ideas that are good can fail. So this is why I favor the more scientific approach in terms of implementation, which guarantees a long-term positive effect on the social intervention in question.

Thank you very much. You know, I think it's really amazing to see the passion in this room. It's almost sad that we don't have more time for discussion here, but the good news is of course everyone is still around. A break is about to follow. And I had to promise to the organizers that we would finish the session on time.

And, of course, you know, we don't want to dishonor promises with our friends from the Skoll Foundation in particular.

So I'd like to conclude simply by saying, I mean, for me, the three insights that I've gained at least during this morning and I am sure we agree on those is it's really amazing to see the power of passion of creativity. Everyone here on this panel is driven. That's the starting point. That's why you manage to build the things that you have built.

But over time all of you have also managed to to find ways to institutionalize some of this. I think Gillian spoke about it specifically, or explicitly, but everyone has done that or is doing that. So, in that sense, I think even though it maybe less fashionable, the engineering perspective is a bit vindicated.

And at the end of the day, I think if we think about leadership, I think we all agree, you know, charisma, passion, that's very important, but we also need to get the structures right. And everyone needs to lead, so I think Bill's vision of 'everyone a change maker' world. This is the direction we need to go; probably here at the Skoll forum well, it's a bit of a no-brainer because everyone at the Skoll forum is a change maker.

But I think we need to ask all of us, ourselves, our friends, how can we cascade that? How can we facilitate the emergence of such spaces in other environments as well, so that we truly arrive at such a context. So it is in a sense about triple E leadership, I would say, if you want to put it that way.

I would like to thank all of you, I'd like to thank the Skoll Foundation, again, for including this aspect in the program. I know it's more of an abstract topic, but I feel we've had a great debate. And I personally feel I've learned a few things. I hope you feel the same. Thank you very much for joining.

Please give a hand to our speakers.
 

Audio