ADVANCED SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Paul C. Light
UPADM-GP 266-001
Spring 2014
Tuesdays/Thursdays 11:00-12:15
194M, Room 307
Contact: paul.light@nyu.edu
Office Hours: Wednesdays at 10:00-12:00, and by appointment
Course Description
This course is designed to give nascent social entrepreneurs/innovators/change agents an
advanced introduction to the process and key tools of successful change. It is based on the
notion that a very high number (perhaps 50 percent) of social innovations die off within five
years of launch, in part because of early errors in judgment and a generally unproductive blend
of over-confidence and optimism. This course will examine the key steps in creating sustainable
social impact, which is, after all the ultimate goal of all social change efforts. The course is
based on a simple chain of effects as follows:
1. Mapping the world as it is (here, the focus is on your own commitment to action, and on
a precise understanding of the problem, and its size, trending, causes, and consequences)
2. Starting the journey to impact (here, the focus is on picking a path that will eventually
lead to a new prevailing wisdom about the problem, and a solution that will break the
social equilibrium) 
3. Designing a solution of consequence (here, the focus is on finding a solution that will
address the core causes of the problem, reverse its size and trend, and assess its
vulnerabilities to failure) 
4. Achieving durable impact (here, the focus is on scaling the solution to achieve lasting
effect, which in turn involves issues of diffusion, measurement, and further research and
development) 
5. Protecting the world as it has become (here, the focus is on defending progress made,
monitoring threats and vulnerabilities, and continuing to assess whether the solution is
actually making a difference as the world changes with it)
The course is designed to follow this chain in rough order, but you are forewarned that the policy
process is often very messy, and rarely follows any order for long. Policy makers often know the
solutions (or so they think) before they identify a problem, for example, and often ignore “goldstandard” policy analysis in making their final choices.
1
Grading
Your grade will be based on the following assignments:
1. 10 percent for your full engagement in the class.
2. 60 points divided equally across three 1,500 word memos:
a. The first will focus on the problem you seek to solve, including a clear, datadriven description of its (1) size, (2) recent trend, (3) causes, and (4)
consequences on the world that you seek to change. The memo is due at the
end of Week Five.
b. The second memo will focus on the solution to your problem, including (1)
the tool you have chosen to solve the problem, (2) a specific description of the
solution, (3) the way in which it addresses the causes you identified in your
first memo, and (4) the current level of support/opposition for action. The
memo is due at the end of the Week Nine.
c. An assumption-based planning examination of the most threatening
assumption to your solution, including (1) the probability that the assumption
will break, (2) a shaping action to achieve the most hopeful outcome, (3) a
hedging action to prevent the most disastrous outcome, and (4) the primary
signpost that you will use to judge the continuing threat of the assumption.
The memo is due at the end of Week Fourteen.
3. 30 points for the final exam.
The memos cannot exceed 1,000 words each. Each memo must be based on at least three
credible, research-based sources—although commission reports, think-tank papers, website data,
magazine, and newspaper articles are no doubt important sources for describing problems,
solutions, and hedging/shaping action, and can be used in your paper, they will not be counted as
credible, research-based sources. There will be an automatic 5-point reduction for lateness.
Memos
All written work will be graded for content and writing. I believe that a good memo must
combine persuasive content and accessible writing—good content without good writing is
confusion, good communication without content is a waste of energy. I strongly encourage you
to read the following article for tips on how to construct a readable memo.
2
I strongly advise you to use the following format for your memos—use standard 1” margins, and
endnotes for your sources:
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Re:
Date:
Paul Light
Introduction to Public Policy Students
Memo Format
September 2014
Generally start each memo with the pronoun “I,” as in “I am writing to discuss the problem of
poor memo writing in the field of social entrepreneurship….”
Then move onto a guide/roadmap of what’s coming, as in “The following memo is divided into
three parts….” Use single spaced paragraphs to address the question at hand, but use double
spaces to separate each paragraph. DO NOT INDENT THE PARAGRAPHS.
Feel free to use bullets to make specific points. Place centered page numbers at the bottom of
each page.
Make sure your writing is clear—read the memo out loud to make sure sentences are relatively
short. Number and indent each section of your memo.
1. Use active voice in your writing.
2. Check your spelling and grammar.
3. Make sure the memo does not exceed word count, has 1” margins on all sides, and is
single-spaced.
4. Staple the memo. No paperclips please.
Use widow/orphan controls to avoid dangling sentences (widows/orphans) across page breaks,
and do not allow hyphenation. I have no preference for left or block paragraph justification, but
will not accept right or centered paragraph justification.
Cite all sources using Arabic-numbered footnotes based on the Turabian style guide found at
http://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/turabian-footnote-guide. Using
word, just click document element, citations, and insert a footnote. End of story.
Nobody is perfect, let alone myself. I find typos and grammatical errors in my books and reports
after proofing, proofing, and more proofing. I am willing to bet there are typos in this syllabus,
even in this short memo. But do your very best to catch the mistakes, and deliver a product that
is both persuasive and polished.
Your memo must have page numbers centered and placed at the bottom of the page. All
paragraphs should be separated by two single spaces.
3
WEEKLY SCHEDULE
I.
DEFINITIONS (Week One)
A.
HOW WILL THIS CLASS WORK?
B.
WHAT IS SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP ANYWAY?
1.
Paul C. Light, The Search for Social Entrepreneurship, Chapters 1 and 7,
an introduction to the big debates about entrepreneurship
2.
Roger L. Martin, and Sally Osberg, “Social Entrepreneurship: The Case
for Definition,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, Spring 2007, a push-back
against the inclusive model of social entrepreneurship
3.
Paul C. Light, Social Entrepreneurship Revisited,” Stanford Social
Innovation Review, 2009; I’m still changing for sure
II.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN CONTEXT (Week Two)
A.
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT ENTREPRENEURING?
1.
Paul C. Light, The Search for Social Entrepreneurship, Chapter 2, a
straightforward assessment of the assumptions we make about the who, where,
and what of social entrepreneurship
2.
Christian Seelos, and Johanna Mair, “Innovation is not the Holy Grail,”
Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall 2012; an accessible discussion of
innovation/entrepreneurship as a process, not an ideology
B.
WHAT WOULD SCHUMPETER SAY?
1.
Carmen Păunescu, “Current Trends in Social Innovation: Social Capital,
Corporate Social Responsibility, Impact Measurement,” Management and
Marketing, Summer 2014), an interesting analysis of the competition between
words in the definition of social change today
2.
Richard N. Langlois, “Schumpeter and the Obsolescence of the
Entrepreneur, Austrian Economics and Entrepreneurial Studies, 2003, a
somewhat dry, but very important analysis of the two Schumpeter’s, and how we
mix up the true meaning of entrepreneurship
4
III.
DESCRIBING THE PROBLEM (Week Three)
A.
WHERE IS THE LOGIC IN LOGIC MODELS?
1.
Innovation Network, Logic Model Workbook, Innovation Network, 2010,
a short guide to building a logic chain; come prepared for class with a drawing of
the logic model for the problem you seek to solve in your work for this class; fill
in the four primary steps: (1) problem, including goal, rational and assumptions,
resources, (2) activities, (3) outputs, and (4) outcomes
B.
WHAT KINDS OF PROBLEMS DO WE FACE?
1.
Jeff Conklin, Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of
Wicked Problems, Chapter 1; a very good definition of “wicked” versus “tame”
problems, and a reasonable set of suggestions for addressing them
2.
IDEO, Human Centered Design Toolkit, 2009, Scan the introduction, then
read Chapter H (HEAR)
IV. MOTIVATING CHANGE (Week Four)
A.
IS EMPATHY THE ANSWER?
1.
Francis B. M. de Waal, “The Antiquity of Empathy,” Science, 2012, very
short piece that lays out a potential model of empathy
2.
Sara H. Konrath, et al. “Changes in Dispositional Empathy in American
College Students Over Time: A Meta-Analysis,” Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 2010
3.
Paul Bloom, “The Baby in the Well: The Case Against Empathy,” The
New Yorker, May 20, 2013; very short, but tough; are we all wired to care too
much?
B.
WHO WILL JOIN YOU?
1.
C. Daniel Batson, Nadia Ahmad, and Jo-Ann Tsang, “Four Motives for
Community Involvement,” Journal of Social Issues, 2002, important for
understanding the motives of the people you activate
V.
DESIGNING SOLUTIONS (Week Five)
A.
DESIGN THINKING
5
1.
Tim Brown, “Design Thinking,” Harvard Business Review, 2009; this is
where it’s at these days in discussion of how to change the world
2.
IDEO, Human Centered Design Toolkit, 2009, Section C (CREATE); a
fairly short introduction to design thinking in action
B.
WHERE AND HOW WILL YOU WORK?
1.
Pino Audia and Christopher Rider, “A Garage and an Idea: What More
Does an Entrepreneur Need?” California Management Review, 2005; a great
article debunking the standard Steve Jobs story
2.
The Rockefeller Foundation and the Bridgespan Foundation, “Social
Innovation Labs: How Social Innovation Labs Can Advance Your Work,” 2014; a
PowerPoint slide deck on the ongoing lab study
3.
Amira Bliss and Nidhi Sahni, “Four Social-Change Results that
Innovation Labs Deliver,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2014; a very short
examination of four high-powered labs in a rapidly growing space
C.
MEMO 1 DUE
VI. THE FOUR PATHS TO SOCIAL IMPACT (Week Six)
A.
WHERE MIGHT WE BEGIN?
1.
SOCIAL EXPLORING (WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW THE PROBLEM)
a)
Brendan Nyhan and Jason Riefler, Misinformation and FactChecking: Research Findings from Social Science, New America
Foundation, February 2012; easy reading, important points about facts
again
2.
SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP (WHEN YOU KNOW THE
PROBLEM, BUT DON’T HAVE A SOLUTION)
a)
Jill Lepore, “The Disruption Machine: What the Gospel of
Innovation Gets Wrong,” New Yorker, 2014; a very tough article that takes
on the guru of “creative destruction”
b)
Drake Bennett, “Clayton Christianson Responds to New Yorker
Takedown of Disruptive Innovation,” Bloomberg Business Week, June 20,
2014; Christianson fires back
B.
WHERE MUST WE GO?
6
1.
SOCIAL ADVOCACY (WHEN YOU KNOW THE PROBLEM AND
SOLUTION, BUT HAVE NOT WON ADOPTION)
a)
Manual Pastor, and Rhonda Ortiz, Making Change: How Social
Movements Work and How to Support Them, Program for Environmental
and Regional Equity, University of Southern California, 2009, executive
summary, introduction, and chapters I, II, and III; a likeable, accessible
report, but skip the literature review
b)
Mark Cheng and Caroline Guyot, “Moving Ideas to the
Mainstream,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2014
2.
SOCIAL DELIVERY (WHEN YOU KNOW THE PROBLEM AND
SOLUTION, HAVE WON ADOPTION, BUT MUST DELIVER AND SCALE)
a)
Paul Light, Sustaining Nonprofit Performance: The Case for
Capacity Building and the Evidence to Support It, Chapter 6; I still like
this piece showing that delivery is a long-term project that moves up the
spiral, gets stuck along the way, or just dies off
VII. SPREADING CHANGE (Week Seven)
A.
HOW DO WE GO TO SCALE?
1.
Jeffrey Bradach and Abe Grindle, “Transformative Scale: The Future of
Growing What Works,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, February, 2014;
another short article on nine different ways to expand social impact
2.
Maria A. May, Amanda j. Misiti, Ishtiaque Hussain, and Asif Saleh,
“What Does It Take to Have Social Impact at Scale?” BRAC, 2014; short article
on BRAC’s research in South East Asia
3.
Susan Davis, “Transformative Scale Means ‘Crowding In,’” Stanford
Social Innovation Review, 2014
B.
HOW DO WE DIFFUSE INNOVATION?
1.
Nicole L. Dubbs and Kerry Anne McGeary, “Four Ways to Spread Ideas,”
Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2014; a set of ideas from the Rockefeller
Foundation
2.
Susan H. Evans, and Peter Clarke, “Disseminating Orphan Innovations,”
Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2011
3.
Atul Gawande, “Slow Ideas: Some Ideas Spread Fast. How Do You
Speed the Ones that Don’t?” New Yorker, July 29, 2013; a great article on why
the use anesthesia spread quickly and antiseptics did not, for class discussion; you
MUST read this
7
VIII. EMBRACING THE FUTURE (Week Eight)
A.
HOW DO WE ACT IN FUTURES TENSE?
1.
Paul J.H. Shoemaker, “Scenario Planning: A Tool for Strategic Thinking,”
Sloan Management Review, 1995; long, but classic; pretty much everything you
need to know about building scenarios against which to plan—scenarios are both
an input, and a way to design solutions
B.
HOW DO WE TRAVEL THROUGH TIME?
1.
Society for International Development and The Rockefeller Foundation,
Building a Searchlight Function, 2010, Forward and Methods; so fast that you
won’t have time to uncap the highlighter
2.
Leon S. Fuerth, with Evan M.H. Faber, Anticipatory Governance:
Practical Upgrades, 2012, Executive Summary, Foreword, and Section [A] only;
you’ll need more time here for sure, but it’s important work
3.
Daniel Smith, “It’s the End of the World as We Know It…and He Feels
Fine,” New York Times Magazine, April 17, 2014; sometimes depressing, even
infuriating piece, for class discussion
IX. CHANGING MINDS (Week Nine)
A.
HOW DO WE CREATE EFFECTIVE MESSAGES?
1.
Frameworks Institute, Changing the Public Conversation on Social Issues:
A Beginners Guide to Strategic Frame Analysis, an e-course located at
http://sfa.frameworksinstitute.org/; an accessible “course” that will take you an
hour or so to read and complete
2.
Go to the Frameworks Institute at frameworks.org, click on the issues tab,
click on an issue that you care about (e.g., children), then click on a sub-issue that
you care about (e.g., child development), and read as much as you can to
understand how framing works
B.
WHEN DO YOU STRIKE?
1.
Frank R. Baumgartner, “Some Thoughts on Reform Miracles,” paper
presented at the Reform Miracles International Seminar, May 27-28, 2005;
relatively short and the most accessible of his arguments; important to understand
the general notion; don’t worry about the equation here and there; stick to the
general notion of why punctuations matter
C.
MEMO 2 DUE: DESCRIBE THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM
8
X.
TESTING SOLUTIONS (Week Ten)
A.
WILL YOUR SOLUTION WORK?
1.
James A. Dewar, Carl H. Building, William M. Hix, and Morlie H. Levin,
Assumption-Based Planning: A Planning Tool for Very Uncertain Times, RAND,
1993, entire; figure out how this applies to solving the problem on your agenda,
and how you might use these tools in everyday life, for class discussion; I use
these tools all the time to make even trivial decisions about everything from
movie times to vacation hotels
B.
AND YOU?
1.
Angela L. Duckworth, Patrick D. Quinn, and Martin E.P. Seligman,
“Positive Predictors of Teacher Effectiveness,” Journal of Positive Psychology,
2009; one of the first assessments of “grit” as a driver of change
2.
Emily Hanford, “Angela Duckworth and the Research on Grit,” American
Radio Works, 2014; also find the time to watch Duckworth’s very accessible,
twenty-minute talk on grit at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaeFnxSfSC4
3.
Complete the very short “grit scale” and check your score
https://sasupenn.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_06f6QSOS2pZW9qR
XI. BUILDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE (Week Eleven)
A.
HOW CAN YOU GROW?
1.
William Foster & Gail Fine, “How Nonprofits Get Really Big,” Stanford
Social Innovation Review, 2007; the rich get richer perhaps
2.
Peter Kim & Jeffrey Bradach, “Why More Nonprofits Are Getting
Bigger,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2012; very short, “we-told-you-so”
piece that fits together with the spiral of nonprofit excellence discussed earlier
3.
Paul Light, The Four Pillars of High Performance: How Robust
Organizations Achieve Extraordinary Results, chapter 2; my outline for creating a
high performing organization
B.
HOW DO WE DELIVER?
1.
IDEO, Design Thinking Toolkit, Section D (DELIVER)
XII. MANAGING THE ECOSYSTEM (Week Twelve)
9
A.
WHAT IS AN ECOSYSTEM?
1.
James F. Moore, “Predators and Prey: A New Ecology of Competition,”
Harvard Business Review, 1993; a sometimes disturbing portrait of using the
ecosystem to crush opposition, but the first article to move the term from
environment policy to business strategy
2.
Paul Bloom, and J. Gregory Dees, “Cultivate Your Ecosystem,” Stanford
Social Innovation Review, 2008; a very useful piece about how organizations
manage and exploit the “ecosystem” in which they operate
B.
HOW DO WE DIFFUSE OUR IDEAS?
XIII. CREATING LASTING CHANGE
A.
HOW DO WE CHANGE AN INDUSTRY?
1.
Andrew B. Hargadon and Yellowlees Douglas, “When Innovations Meet
Institutions: Edison and the Design of the Electric Light,” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 2001; no doubt one of the great breakthroughs in history, but how did
it happen and what kind of change occurred?
2.
Alex Neuhoff, Katie Smith Milway, Reilly Kieman, and Josh Grehen,
Making Sense of Nonprofit Collaborations, 2014; a quick, but fresh view of a new
way to think of working together as innovators/entrepreneurs
B.
HOW DOES THE STATUS QUO REACT?
1.
Larry Downes, and Paul F. Nunes, “Big Bang Disruption: A New Kind of
Innovator Can Wipeout Incumbents in a Flash,” Harvard Business Review,
March, 2013; a strong piece on how innovators can remake the world as it is, but
also about how the world as it is can defend itself.
XIV. DEFENDING SUCCESS (Week Fourteen)
A.
HOW DO YOU PROTECT THE GAINS?
1.
Paul C. Light, “From Endeavor to Achievement and Back Again,” in
Steven Conn, To Promote the General Welfare: The Case for Big Government,
2013; the companion to my 2000 piece; you don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s
gone
B.
MEMO 3 DUE
10