Professor Walter Baets
Tel: +27 21 406 1418
Fax: +27 21 421 0266
Email: walter.baets@gsb.uct.ac.za
University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business
PRME Sharing Information on Progress Report 2010
The Director’s Letter
Since our adherence to the Principles of Responsible Management Education, and
since my arrival as director at the Graduate School of Business, we have steered the
school slowly but certainly in the direction of school with a higher focus on
responsibility, sustainability and relevance to societal context. In order to structure
this emergence, we have agreed on a new vision and mission, that might be worth
explaining before going into the detail of the actions.
Why it is time for a new model of business school and what it could look like
The vision
The UCT Graduate School of Business’ (GSB) goal is to be a leading emergent
market business school that is relevant both internationally and to its local social
context and excellent in research, teaching and outreach. The School is committed to
building a new model of a business school – one that is grounded in values and based
on the paradigm of the emergent market.
The GSB defines emergent as regions that experience high uncertainty, high
complexity, and often excessive inequality. As much as this is true for what is
classically called the emergent economies (such as Brazil, India and SA), uncertainty,
complexity and inequality are equally issues for the company in turbulent economies.
Emergent market thinking is therefore not a geographical construct. The whole world
is operating within times of great uncertainty and complexity and everybody needs to
learn to operate successfully within that.
The GSB trusts that the exploration of the paradigm of the emergent economy will
bring interesting insights into how business could be done differently and it aims to
become a world leader in this sphere within five years.
The context
Considering critically the causes of the current financial crisis, one can say that
"business as usual" is no longer the way to achieve sustainable success. The classical
approach to business that we have seen over the last few decades does not appear to
work.
Managers need an expanded skill set that creates new models of business. This means
that in their turn, business schools need to be autocritical and rethink what they offer
to the world.
It is a viewpoint that has begun to permeate the corridors of some business schools
globally.
David Schmittlein, Dean of the Sloan School of Management at MIT in the US,
recently said in a speech in Paris that the current crisis should be an opportunity to
change the behaviour of managers, and in particular to help them learn to be more
courageous. Courageous for him means implementing long-term strategies and not
focussing on short-term gain. His speech went strongly against what is classically
heard in business schools.
He stated that business has thought for decennia that the goal of all good managers is
to maximise shareholder value: and the shareholders, of course, are very often just in
it for a short-term profit.
If we want to avoid the next crisis, we need to deliver those courageous managers and
leaders, individuals who are able – and willing – to think in the longer term.
Schmittlein said something else very interesting. If the crisis invites business schools
to teach new strategies, it will equally change our way of teaching, encouraging us to
embrace a real openness and take a holistic approach to the world. In short, he
encourages us to lay a more values-based foundation.
This may not be the perspective you would expect from the head of a business school,
but in the context of the current economic turmoil, values are the only sure foundation
to build on. Building a vision starts with identifying the values we want to
realise. What are we doing it for? What do we contribute to society?
The UCT GSB is unusual among business schools in that it has a strong set of values,
which were developed in consultation with the GSB community, that help it to answer
these questions.
There are a number of reasons why business schools have been cited as having
contributed to the economic crisis. While one should not generalise, there are
elements that have become part of many business schools that reinforce the narrow
focus on shareholder value.
To understand how business school curricula have evolved in this way, one needs to
start by understanding the context – in the 70s and 80s of the last century we saw the
rise of a very reductionist interpretation of economics and, in line with this, a very
reductionist view of management. Economists like Friedrich Hayek and Milton
Friedman developed this reductionist view of value, and, due to the fact that they take
the holistic view of value creation out, shareholder value became automatically
prevailing.
The financial markets became the holy grail, and the concept of “the wealth of
nations” was replaced by the concept of “the wealth of individuals”. Managers
became more and more concerned with their share price and shareholder value in this
context. The subprime crisis and other failures like Enron have shown us this clearly –
managers were rewarded with big bonuses for financially exotic deals, and there was
little focus on risk or real return, but rather on volume. The decline of stakeholder
importance is similarly apparent in the pursuit of ever cheaper labour.
Today we can again talk about a more holistic interpretation of economics. Business
schools globally have begun to re-discuss the value question (or the value
creation question) but from a different perspective. Some, like the UCT Graduate
School of Business, are endeavouring to re-establish the stakeholder perspective – we
are placing the focus on uncertainty, complexity, value driven management, personal
development, social responsibility and diversity. The overarching drive is to create a
new model of business school based on the paradigm of the emergent economy
(which is characterised by high degrees of uncertainty, complexity and inequality)
Taking action: a new model of a business school
What would the model of a business school based on the paradigm of the emergent
economy look like? This is a difficult question, and one that management educators
globally have been grappling with of late.
In December 2008, around 300 management educators (deans, directors, professors)
met in the UN headquarters in New York for the First Global Forum for Responsible
Management Education.
The New York Forum was a continuation of an ongoing discussion amongst
academics, which began with the presentation of six principles on responsible
management education to the Secretary General of the UN at the Global Compact
Summit in July 2007 in Geneva.
The December meeting was to table how these principles apply in management
education. I had the pleasure of presenting the results of the workgroup on new
learning methodologies.
The consensus at the Global Forum was that sustainable principles in management
should address a number of domains: the spiritual, the biosphere, the social, the
economic and the material (materials, energy). By preference all together, not just one
of them.
What in effect is called for is a “systems thinking” approach in management education
that imbues students with an understanding of the complex, interconnected world
around them and the impact of their decisions on this world, as well an understanding
that their own success is linked to the success of those around them.
Business schools have generally made the mistake of believing that business
management is about taking a scientific approach. This has led to executives believing
that problems can be solved by distilling them to their core, and fixing that. The
assumption is that when each core problem is fixed, so is the whole. That doesn’t
work so well in an interrelated world.
Consistent with the demand for a systemic approach to a new paradigm of business,
current and future managers need to learn new competencies and an appreciation that
they cannot serve only the shareholder and hope that this is best for all stakeholders.
As business schools, I believe we are called on to better integrate a more holistic and
systemic way of viewing the world into our methodologies.
While the UN Global Forum for Responsible Management has shed light on the path
we can take to avoid a global catastrophe of this magnitude and nature in future,
action needs to be taken now.
At the UCT Graduate School of Business, the foundation for a new type of business
school is already being laid. The School has a set of values and has as one of its
strengths a focus on systems thinking and action learning that very few business
schools internationally can match.
A holistic management interpretation1
The GSB champions a holistic approach to management. Despite the fact that the
prevailing Anglo-Saxon approach to management has added insight and value to our
understanding of the functioning of markets and companies – it champions too narrow
a focus for what is now needed in business.
A more holistic, systemic approach that celebrates diversity is required to enrich the
prevailing Anglo-Saxon model. The holistic management diagram developed by
Wilber helps in understanding why and how this might be achieved.
A holistic management model
•Personal development
•Leadership
•Making a difference
•Self motivation
•Emotional development
•Joy
•Involvement
•Responsibility
•Respect
Individual
Personal
Development
(Learner centered)
Management
techniques
Internalised
•Historic legitimacy
•Diversity
•Sustainable development
(long term perspective)
•Social responsibility
•Sociology
•Humanism
•Relativism
Externalised
Values and
culture
(identity)
Systemic
management
approaches
Networked
1
•Quantitative approaches
•Control/performance
•Management by
objectives
•Models
•Financial orientation
•Short term efficiency
•Production management
•Dynamic system behavior
•Management in complexity
•Management in diversity
•Knowledge management
•Community of practices
•Ecological management
•Ethics in management
•Social corporate responsibility
•Sustainable development
•The networked economy
•Emergence, innovation…
Baets W and Oldenboom E, Rethinking Growth: Social intrapreneurship for sustainable performance, Palgrave,
2009
From the model it is clear that the dominant Anglo-Saxon approach (called
management techniques in the diagram) does not sit in isolation or in a hierarchy in
this model, but rather as one part of a whole.
Working hand-in-hand with functional management techniques are three other areas
of equal importance for creating a sustainable organisation – systemic management
approaches, values and culture, and personal development.
Seeing the four elements or quadrants as part of a whole, it is immediately clear that
this model would create a more people-focused, value-driven and value-creating
organisation than what is currently the norm.
To examine the diagram more closely, diagonally opposite to the Anglo-Saxon or
mechanistic approach to management is the values and culture dimension of the
holistic model. Such a vision – in which values and culture are elevated in importance
and not simply a side issue to the business of profit-making – can only be translated
into action by people who have the qualities and the motivation to make a real
difference in the world.
In addition, the model necessitates a strong focus on personal development (upper-left
quadrant) as a backbone for all managerial approaches, and highlights the need for
companies to be organised around life-long learning and career development for their
employees. So, in other words, human resource management becomes a key element
of the management function in the holistic approach.
The bottom right quadrant is represented by systemic management approaches.
Systems, in this sense, are interacting elements that create a logic of their own, that
surpass the simple addition of the composing elements. So this quadrant contains the
more ecological approaches to management: network theories and applications;
sustainable development models; complexity theory; and concepts around diversity as
a constructive force etc.
Practicing a holistic management approach requires the interweaving of all four
quadrants.
It is only by pulling the four elements together that an individual can develop into a
responsible manager who is able to pilot a company for sustainable performance. A
manager, just as any other employee, becomes the entrepreneur of his or her own
development, within a dense and intensive network of peers. In contrast, the AngloSaxon model is focused mainly in the upper-right corner and, therefore, although
companies might pay some attention to culture, or personal development, the focus
remains firmly on the realisation of financial results.
A holistic model, on the other hand, demands that organisations satisfy the needs of
more stakeholders than just its shareholders.
Four pillars of excellence
The GSB’s mission is to build and strengthen four pillars of excellence that underpin
and inform the new model it is seeking to develop.
1. Academic Excellence
While most business schools develop academic strength via a few strong disciplinary
faculty groups (finance, marketing, strategy etc.), the GSB is developing its academic
excellence in the trans-disciplinary theme of Emergent Market Business. The systemic
research themes are: 1) Governance in Emergent Economies; 2) Development,
Innovation & Technology; 3) Entrepreneurial Development & Sustainable Business;
4) Diversity, Dynamics & Culture; 5) Infrastructure, Reform and Regulation.
2. Societal Relevance
A business school cannot live outside its economic and social environment and has to
take up its own societal responsibility. The GSB is committed to transformation and
equality in all its aspects. This commitment to social responsiveness is in line with
UCT’s strategic goal to enhance the university’s contribution to addressing key
development challenges facing South Africa. At the GSB this is achieved specifically
through: research, for example the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor research carried
out by the Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship which investigates how to
boost entrepreneurship in the South Africa economy; policy and advocacy, for
example, the work around electricity regulation carried out via the Infrastructure,
Reform and Regulation programme run by Anton Eberhard; strategic partnerships,
for example the Raymond Ackerman Academy of Entrepreneurial Development that
seek to develop entrepreneurial mindsets among disadvantaged South African youth;
and student and staff outreach activities that range from fundraising to building
homes for Habitat for Humanity.
3. Pedagogical Excellence
The GSB has developed teaching excellence through its application of SYSTAL
(Systems Thinking Action Learning). Innovations in the areas of transformative
learning and personal development are integrated into the curricula of many of the
programmes. These learning processes and holistic management approaches (as
outlined above) are globally recognised as being at the vanguard of management
education.
4. Thought Leadership
The GSB provides genuine thought leadership, not only in South Africa, but also in
the wider African continent, as well as the BRICSA countries. This thought leadership
is demonstrated to business and society through strong activity in executive education,
corporate learning and a robust culture of debate. The newly launched GSB PhD
programme is growing a pool of home-grown African talent that will invigorate the
School’s thought leadership in the region.
Principle 3
Method: We will create educational frameworks, materials, processes and
environments that enable effective learning experiences for responsible leadership.
HLUMA - ENTREPRENEURIAL VILLAGE:
OUTREACH INITIATIVE FOR SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Introduction
In 2010, GSB completed both the institutional and technological platform by which
to launch the innovative entrepreneurial development outreach initiative of Hluma.
Institutionally, GSB has partnered with SHAWCO, a long-established universitybased and student-run organization renowned for its development-oriented work in
the surrounding township and rural communities of Cape Town and broader South
Africa. Technologically, the Hluma web-based protocol has been tested and affirmed
in its functionality, prepared for the pilot programs to be launched in early 2011. The
following section describes the distinct concept and structure of Hluma, and offers it
as an example by which responsible management educational institutions are to
extend their knowledge and expertise to relevantly contributing to the progress of
society in which they are embedded.
Aims
 Democratise management education
 Provide an innovative alternative for dealing with larger populations of people
that are in demand for management education
 Innovate the pedagogical model and therefore has a specific target group and it
needs a specific type of organization.
Objectives
 Provide learners with entrepreneurial competencies and knowledge of the
basics of management
 Provide a higher “return on education” through a projects based on a learningby-doing approach
 Create immediate practical and relevant output (a business plan)
 Allow for truly international delivery and learning, using a virtual learning
laboratory. This project could in a later stage be rolled out, outside SA
 Create a network of people and ideas, that are able to generate new business
proposals and that can contribute to local sustainable development
 Mass management education
Market
Within a focus on (young) adults, three target groups have been identified:
 Unskilled people with specific training needs. This can include employees,
individuals or SMEs that want to take their business to a higher level.


Poorly qualified individuals excluded from the school system
Entrepreneurs who wants to create their own company
Program
The content of Hluma consists of the following:
 Roughly 300 management concepts
 Around 50 cases (initially)
 5 courses of each around 100 working hours: Marketing, Finance, HRM and
personal development, Strategy and complexity, Process Modelling
 A module on innovation and entrepreneurship, eventually ending up in the
realisation of a business plan
 Collaborative tools
 Personal follow-up module and possibility for co-coaching
The program is driven by the “skill development” axis, as discussed earlier. It is
completely assignment driven, and it is all tutor supported. The program is meant for
a group of around 10 “students” to work together on the assignments, under the
guidance of a skilled tutor (trained by the GSB). Thos tutors can be either MBA
students, social workers, alumni, or anybody who is willing to engage and has a
minimum training in either business or tutoring.
Historical and Conceptual Background
Business management education needs to be relevant in the first place, and this on all
levels. Relevance means value based, meaningful business, contributing to society
and its development, creating value where it does not yet exist. Business management,
from a developmental point of view is entrepreneurial, creative and innovative. Over
the years, we have organised business management education in a rather elite way,
increasingly oriented towards techniques and disciplines. We have lost sight of the
holistic character of business management; we have lost sight of the purpose of
business management. While business schools flourish, entrepreneurial development
on a wider scale is left too much out.
Intercultural dialogue is today a matter of necessity, not choice. Faculty members,
staff and the student body are rarely a homogeneous group nowadays. Too often,
higher education is based on one prevailing cultural model: in business education it is
the Anglo Saxon model, as created, mainly, by the US Business Schools. Textbooks
and teaching/learning approaches are designed in order to fit that culture. Even the
entry criteria (in business education the GMAT test) fit that one prevailing culture.
With a growing internationalisation of the world, we have not paid enough attention
to the cultural diversification of (higher) education. Textbooks and learning
approaches are indeed highly context bound. However, different learning approaches,
translating cultural diversity, can seriously enrich mutual learning. The modern
university has grown out of the creative co-existence of different ‘cultures of learning’
– both termed disciplines and pedagogical models – out of different ways of seeing
the world and of defining and studying it.
In Hluma (the name we gave to this approach), a different pedagogical model is
proposed, that allows not only to host cultural diversity, but even more so to learn
from cultural diversity. This model advances the notion of diversity as an asset of
outstanding value. It concentrates on the essentials: entrepreneurship, creation and
innovation. It is based on learning by doing.
This model has been used for the first time, as the basis for the Euro-Arab
Management School (EAMS), a joint project of the EU, the league of Arab States and
the Spanish Government (in the 1990s). The briefing for this school was to create a
pedagogical approach and pedagogical material that could be used through a network
of partner schools (in Europe and the Arab countries), allowing them each and all to
adapt to their specific settings. It should allow an easy roll-out, throughout a vast
geographical territory, and should be very hands on (relevant for developmental
purposes). It should be highly cost-effective. For obvious reasons, this model is a
hybrid one, combining tutoring, peer-learning and action based learning (and no
teaching). The eventual network of learners, becomes the kernel for further
development within their respective communities.
The pedagogical concept: learning instead of teaching; learner centred instead of
teacher centred; individualised approach
As already suggested, in order to be able to allow and use diversity as a constructive
principle, the pedagogical model needs to be highly individualised, and focused on the
personality of the “learner” (the one that wants to learn). Most classical pedagogical
approaches, though, are based on a standardised curriculum, focusing on (standard)
content. These approaches are in fact based on what is known as the transfer
metaphor of education. (For detail on all this, please refer to Baets and Van der
Linden, 2000 and 2003).
Classically, business schools consider knowledge in general and, more specifically,
subject matters, as transferable commodities. A student is seen as a vessel positioned
alongside a loading dock. ‘Knowledge’ is poured into the vessel until it is full.
Whereas the student is the empty vessel, the teacher is a crane or a forklift. The
teacher delivers and places knowledge into the empty vessel. Courses applying the
transfer theory would be very much lecture-based, would include talks from leading
figures in the relevant fields (the more the better) and would provide students with
duplicated course notes. Once the vessel is filled, a ‘bill of loading’, which is the
diploma, certifies the content of the vessel. IT improves the speed of the loading
(with high tech cranes). Nobody can guarantee that in the next harbour, the cargo is
not taken out of the ship again. Monitoring a student means monitoring the process of
filling the vessel, signing off the bill of loading, and sometimes sampling the quality
of the contents.
Our pedagogical approach, instead, is built on a different concept by which the
teacher initiates and guides the students through an unknown terrain that needs to be
explored. The student is the explorer and the teacher/tutor is the experienced and
expert travelling companion and counsellor. The guide not only points out the way,
but also provides travelling maps and a compass. To a certain extent, the ‘teaching
methods’ (if one can still call them such) which are used in applying this concept are
more experiential methods: learning while creating one’s own business plan. In this
theory, the monitoring process consists of monitoring the personal development of the
student. It should not be forgotten that becoming a manager, in many respects, is
working on one’s own personality, more than anything else.
The consequence of the application of this ‘new’ pedagogical metaphor is that
management education should pay more attention to the managerial process than to
the theoretical knowledge supporting it. Management education should be more
competency driven than knowledge driven. It should not be an organised search for
the Holy Grail: the one (always) best solution; for the simple reason that the chance is
little that this solution exists. Even more, management education should not attempt
to look only for solutions, but rather for possible ways of travelling.
Hluma Structure and Process
A “course” in entrepreneurial development is designed within a pedagogical platform
and approach called “The Innovation School”: a virtual learning platform, an
innovative and cutting edge pedagogical approach bringing learning onto the work
floor into the very heart of managerial action, integrating knowledge management and
learning into every day learning-while-doing situations. This platform is designed by
Walter Baets, and in its fourth version developed by Euromed Management. The
course design, the platform design, the learning design and the platform are available.
The Innovation School is a learning laboratory; that contains theoretical content,
cases, course assignments, business information sources and collaborative tools. The
content is hypertext linked, based on the semantics of concepts and cases. This allows
full freedom of learning at any level of pre-knowledge for each and every individual.
Each learner can progress at their own level, pace and interest. Learning is completely
individualised, taking into account the diversity of each user. All content is accessible
via multiple entries (per concept, via assignments, via a semantic search engine, etc).
The learning platform contains personal workspaces, in which the competency
management of the individual can be monitored and managed. Collaborative tools are
available (such as Wiki’s and chat facilities). Most innovative and unique is the
semantic linking between the concepts, and its visual semantic tree representation that
goes with it.
The platform is designed in Moodle (free software), using Wikipedia concepts (free of
charge), and the kernel of Innovation School (made available by Euromed
Management).
The Innovation School is equally a ground breaking pedagogical innovation. The
approach is completely learning-by-doing driven, putting the learner in the center of
the action. Each individual can learn what they want to learn, whenever, wherever and
following a free and personal learning path. The learner steers their own learning,
guidance is given through assignments (organised around the 4 basics of management
and an entrepreneurial theme). Faculty becomes tutors, facilitating the learning of
individuals. Assignments can be brought into the daily work of the users allowing
learning and knowledge management to flow together; learning becomes integrated
into daily work practice. We have stopped schooling and finally allowed learning.
INNOVATION SCHOOL
Business management education has four dimensions. We need to know some
concepts (like ROI, market segmentation, cost structure, etc). However, this
knowledge in itself is not going to make us a manager/entrepreneur. We need to
know how those concepts apply (and that is where in general cases come in).
However, the real difference is made in the third and fourth dimension. The third
dimension is de development of competencies, skills, in order to be able to do
something with those concepts and application one self. That can only happen via
activities (therefore learning by doing). The fourth dimension is personal
development: your development into a creator, somebody who is able to act, to take
responsibility.
The responsibility of learning is brought back into the learner. The tutor facilitates
learning and challenges personal development. A tutor is no longer a domain expert
but a facilitator, and that can be trained in a train the trainer program. Virtually any
dedicated person (MBA student, social worker, entrepreneur, coach) could become a
tutor of Hluma.
The pedagogical concept of learning-by-doing and learning-while-doing, on which the
Innovation School and Hluma is based, is both well researched (see references) and
has already proven its value added in real life learning projects (it is used for all
fundamental courses in management in Euromed Management). However, we feel
that the personal contact and groupwork is certainly equally important, this we like to
call a “Hybrid Learning Solution”. The latter aspect would necessitate involvement
partners that could deliver tutoring (and hence face to face contact) “locally”. Hluma
is not run at the GSB, but wherever need and interest is.
Hluma Implementation
Hluma is a project that is part of the GSB, that guarantees the quality of both the
content and the tutoring. The GSB designs a “train the trainer” program, familiarising
future tutors with the content of the program and its practical operation. Furthermore,
the art of tutoring will be discussed. Those tutors will be equipped in order to reach
out and work with potential learners/entrepreneurs, during an equivalent of a four
month full time period.
In the long run, a franchise appears to be the most plausible option for the delivery.
The franchisees can be any NGO, or any organisation willing to guarantee the correct
delivery of the program. They would be trained by the GSB.
Examinations qualifications could be subcontracted to bodies in micro finance.
Qualification (a certificate) is delivered by the GSB. An adapted examination and
grading approach needs to be developed.
For the GSB, this is an outreach initiative, that aims to innovative considerably
management education where it is most needed. In a start up phase, we will need a
minimum staff to run this operation, some servers and a minimum IT support. The
GSB will run the project and guarantee its quality, but in the pilot phase we will use
the Shawco (UCT NGO) network of community centers (where there is for the time
being safe and secured computer equipment). A pilot will be run for 1 year in those
five centers.
This pilot will allow us to demonstrate the potential and to find the necessary further
partners for a roll-out. We need partners that have computer equipment and some
broadband available and that are willing to send some tutors on training. We could
either think about NGOs, community centers, or governmental organisations.
Measurement of impact
In the first place, the impact of the pilot can be measured by the number of students
on board, the number of working hours spend per student, the throughput (students
successfully graduating). Over time it would be good to try and keep trace of the
number of start-ups, the number of students that continue education, and the number
of students that get a management related job.
References
Baets W and Van der Linden G, The Hybrid Business School: Developing knowledge
management through management learning, Prentice Hall, 2000
Baets W and Van der Linden G, Virtual Corporate Universities: A matrix of
knowledge and learning for the new digital dawn, Kluwer Academic, 2003
Principle 4
Research: We will engage in conceptual and empirical research that advances our
understanding about the role, dynamics, and impact of corporations in the creation of
sustainable social, environmental and economic value.
Related GSB Faculty Research Areas
Dr. Ralph Hamann, Associate Professor
Ralph is Associate Professor and Research Director at the University of Cape
Town Graduate School of Business (GSB). He directs and teaches MBA
courses on research methodology and sustainable enterprise, and teaches on a
variety of other courses, including the Executive MBA. His research is on
strategic change in organizations and governance systems in response to
complex socio-ecological problems, with a focus on food security, climate
change and human rights issues in extractive industries.
Ralph is also extraordinary associate professor at the Sustainability Institute at
Stellenbosch University, where he has been teaching a Masters module on
corporate citizenship. In addition to scholarly work, he is a founding director
of FutureMeasure, a company that provides an internet-based sustainability
performance measurement system. Previous positions include research-related
roles at the Environmental Evaluation Unit at the University of Cape Town,
the Unisa Centre for Corporate Citizenship, and the African Institute for
Corporate Citizenship. Ralph's research and consulting experience includes
work in diverse countries in Africa, as well as in Europe and Asia.
He has a PhD from the University of East Anglia with a thesis on corporate
responsibility in the South African mining sector. His prior education includes
a BSc in Environmental and Geographical Science and in Ocean and
Atmosphere Science, and an MSc in Environmental and Geographical
Science, all at the University of Cape Town.
Ralph has published about 50 scholarly publications, about half of which are
peer-reviewed articles, and he is on the editorial board of Environment:
Linking Science and Policy for Sustainable Development and of Development
Southern Africa (both published by Taylor and Francis). His recent
publications include the award-winning co-edited volume The Business of
Sustainable Development: Human rights, partnerships and alternative business
models, published by Unisa Press and the United Nations University Press.
Dr. Eliada Nwosu, Senior Lecturer
Dr. Nwosu received her doctorate from the University of Pittsburgh Graduate
School of Public and International Affairs (Pennsylvania, USA), where she
specialised in International Development (Economics) and Global Political
Economics. Prior to this she had completed her bachelor’s degree in
Sociology at Yale University (Connecticut, USA), before going on to study
her Masters in International Development at the University of Pittsburgh.
Nwosu’s research examines the social embeddeness of both social and small
commercial enterprises within the African economic context, investigating
how contextual and social network facilitate the entrepreneurial process of
(social) enterprise development. She investigates how social structure
(networks) informs African entrepreneurial development, and the role of
entrepreneurship in facilitating local economic and social development within
African communities. Her current research specifically explores the structure
of black South Africans’ entrepreneurial social networks and the value derived
and perceived to contribute to their small businesses’ development. She looks
to expand the study to other African countries. At UCT’s Graduate School of
Business, Nwosu contributes research and teaching to the arenas of Social
Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurship in emerging African markets.
Prior to UCT, Nwosu has conducted qualitative research on international
development in other African countries and served as a Research Intern at the
African Institute of South Africa (Pretoria, SA). Nwosu additionally brings
experience in experiential, innovative, and community-oriented teaching in
multicultural settings through her work as Coordinator of International
Programming at the Office of Cross Cultural and Leadership Development
(University of Pittsburgh) and former Program Director of the InterCultural
House of Pittsburgh.
Principle 5
Partnership: We will interact with managers of business corporations to extend our
knowledge of their challenges in meeting social and environmental responsibilities
and to explore jointly effective approaches to meeting these challenges.
GSB HLUMA IMPLEMENTATION IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SHAWCO
GSB has the pleasure of cultivating a strong relationship with SHAWCO, a studentbased independent organization affiliated with the University of Cape Town that
originated in addressing health disparities within the South African society. Now the
organization has evolved over years to diversify its range of activities which have
immediate effects on community development. Primarily, SHAWCO is increasingly
incorporating the ideals and strategies of social entrepreneurship into its mission and
organizational design to not only ensure its sustainability and effectiveness, but more
so, to provide essential skills to community members of South African townships and
rural areas to promote innovation and economic self-sufficiency within these areas as
well.
In 2010, plans were confirmed to w increase the capacity of SHAWCO student
trainers – and in turn, South African township entrepreneurs – via the Hluma
Outreach Training. Through this interactive, integrative process of understanding
entrepreneurial development – embedded in the ideals of social entrepreneurship
delivered within complimentary lessons of social and cultural relevance, students will
be equipped to extend this training to South African township and rural entrepreneurs
who seek to further substantiate their venture through increased applicable
knowledge. Traditionally SHAWCO has served 240 South African township
opportunities – primarily from the areas of Khayalitsha and Nyanga – over the
duration of two 6 month courses. Strategic planning is underway for the pilot that will
serve approximately 30 entrepreneurs in a selected community in South Africa. The
initiative will then be extended to serve more entrepreneurs throughout the second
half of the year, receiving consistent support and mentorship from the GSB.
GSB AND AFRICAN
WESTERN CAPE
SOCIAL
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
NETWORK-
In the spirit of increasing its relevance in the broader entrepreneurial community of
various stakeholders, who are committed to market-driven social and environmental
change, the GSB has partnered with the African Social Entrepreneurship Network.
The GSB works closely with the Western Cape branch of ASEN to host forums,
convene educational opportunities, and bring in speakers who can elaborate upon the
works being done in respective areas of Africa and the globe.
African Social Entrepreneurship Network – Brief Description
The African Social Entrepreneurs Network is a platform that was created with a
purpose of bringing together social entrepreneurs across the continent to network,
collaborate and learn from each other and from thought leaders in the social sector.
The network plays a key role in the build-up to and the hosting of the Social
Enterprise World Forum (SEWF) in 2011, a leading international event which
highlights the growing recognition of social enterprises as a viable response to the
social challenges facing the world today.
The purpose of the network is to drive debate and dialogue of social entrepreneurship
through the provision of open and easily accessible platforms for the exchange of
ideas, intellectual capital and other relevant information that will further the
development of the social entrepreneurial space in Africa. To this end, the network
collaborates with academic institutions to raise the profile of social entrepreneurship
among the youth; with government to create an enabling environment for the sector;
with the private sector to communicate the viability of social enterprises for
investment; and with other civil society institutions to grow the movement of active
citizenship through social entrepreneurship.
Principle 6
Dialogue: We will facilitate and support dialog and debate among educators,
business, government, consumers, media, civil society organizations and other
interested groups and stakeholders on critical issues related to global social
responsibility and sustainability.
We understand that our own organizational practices should serve as example of the
values and attitudes we convey to our students.
INAUGURAL AFRICAN SOCIAL
(HOSTED BY GSB AND ASEN)
NOVEMBER 24TH, 2010
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
FORUM
This initial event convened social entrepreneurs of the broader Cape Town
metropolitan region as well as members of provincial government, business
development organizations, and research organizations. A speaker and panel were
featured, who engaged with the audience in a conversation about social enterprise
organizational structures, and their respective costs and benefits. Approximately 70
participants attended the forum with the promise of increased attendance in the
upcoming forums.
Forthcoming 18 Months:
The upcoming 18 months are strategically geared towards the launching and
development of the GSB’s Center for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship.
Involve in the Center’s materialization, as well the fulfilment of the UCT’s
PRME-related goals, would be the following activities.
Principle 1: Purpose – Building the Capability of Students
 GSB’s participation and African-based coordination of the Global Social
Venture Competition as a regional partner, coordinated internationally
by UC Berkeley.
 Establish on-site ‘incubation’ for the support and maturation of studentdriven social entrepreneurial ideas.
 Conducting of a speaker series on social innovation, initiated by the
hosting of Michael Norton of Unlimited South Africa.
Principle 2: Values – Development of Socially-responsible academic activities and
curricula
 Focus on solidifying curriculum – both MBA-focused and short courses with social innovation and sustainable enterprise leanings.
Principle 3: Methods – Creation of Educational Frameworks, Materials, and
Processes
 Formal testing and expansion of the Hluma Entrepreneurial Village.
Principle 4: Research – Conceptual and Empirical Research of Sustainable social,
Economic, and environmental value.
 Institutional fundraising confirmed to support the establishment of
Academic chairs in related arenas of social innovation and value-based
leadership to bolster cutting edge research in those fields.
Principle 5: Partnership – Interaction with Managers and Business Partners
Principle 6: Dialogue – Facilitate and Support Dialogue and Debate
 Conference on Youth-Driven Social Innovation (collaboration of GSB,
ASEN, and the Skoll Center, Oxford; hosted by the GSB)
Tentatively July, 2011

International Conference on the Business of Social and Environmental
Innovation (collaboration of multiple partners; led and hosted by the
GSB)
November 14-15, 2011