Monday, February 18, 2013

tweets feb 18 - scale the individual

DML Research Hub (@dmlresearchhub)
2/16/13 8:59 AM
Citizenville: How to Take the Townsquare Digital and Reinvent Government

David Cohen (@davidcohen)
2/16/13 10:02 AM
what's the first month of @techstars like? a founder shares.…
I’m starting to fully appreciate the importance of forming real friendships with others in the startup space. When you can’t bullshit each other and can trust telling each other your deepest darkest fears, you form truly strong bonds that help you conquer amazing challenges and grow in profound ways.
It’s one of the biggest lessons I want to take back to Madison with me. Our startup scene and city will grow best when we form more informal relationships with each other outside of work. When we feel more comfortable sharing the realities of running a startup, we can receive and give the best advice. But it’s a two-way street.
lisagansky (@instigating)
2/16/13 10:04 AM
Architects, Inventors and Collaborators - the people who drive change via social by Brian Quinn 

ReachScale (@ReachScale)
2/16/13 10:05 AM
Need to Scale: #SocialEnterprises & Community Health #EconDev#HBSABC #SocEnt
support of social innovation (The New Triple Bottom Line,) we found Verizon Foundation’s new efforts laudable: an innovative step that ensures that technology is actually used for good. In their words, "For the first time at Verizon we are integrating our technology solutions and philanthropy to accelerate change in healthcare and improve patient outcomes.
sounds like public Ed.. improve outcomes.. decided by whom?  sounds like a proving issue 
perhaps instead.. we improve patients.. meaning all people.. meaning.. scale the individual  sounds like a people issue 
Social entrepreneurs are infamously unwilling to wait on governments, and nearly one-fifth of them focus on healthcare, water and sanitation. The remaining 80 percent innovate with business, technology and finance models. Many options for economic empowerment are available -- as exemplified by leaders like Professor Yunus and by a million or more social entrepreneurs around the globe who are actively exploring new approaches and better solutions.
The questions that must be answered include:
  • Are these social entrepreneurs important to expanding primary health systems across Africa and Asia?
  • What role should they play in addressing needs around food production and nutrition, education, water and sanitation, technology innovation and entrepreneurship?
  • How can philanthropists, non-profits, corporations and local and national governments decide where to invest for most impact?
  • And finally, how can we share innovations that create income in communities and enable sustainable payments to CHWs, teachers and other critical social capital developers?
i recently heard a healthcare professional say.. bottom line... listen to your gut.

that sounds like unschooling 
that sounds like a means to equity. today.
no need for prep or training or these essential questions.. (as in common core essential questions.. as in above )
the only essential question.. every day.. am. do ing what matters.. or what matters.
then unleashing people from all the research/mandates/assumptions/prestige/raised eyebrows...

free people up ... to listen to their guts

today I am alive.
this is not ridiculous 
Most social entrepreneurs start with a very personal obsession to improve lives by solving a challenge or inequality. They prefer to spend as little time as possible fundraising, and often they bring innovations to the table that decades of nonprofit work have not uncovered.
Social enterprises typically get off the ground with a small loan, such as the $36 that funded Professor Yunus and his innovation of microfinance. As Yunus points out in every speech he gives, “When I saw a problem, I started a business to solve it.

on loan to us ...was kids' minds..

spaces. and resources. 
Microfinance has demonstrated that the leadership of several global innovators-- combined with support from multiple NGO and private sector players with sustainable and therefore scalable business models -- can aggregate to billions of dollars. AsBusinessWeek described the Nobel Peace Prize win of 2005:“Grameen Bank, a leading advocate for the world's poor that has lent more than $5.1 billion to 5.3 million people. The bank is built on Yunus' conviction that poor people can be both reliable borrowers and avid entrepreneurs.”

The drive to organize these portfolios can come from the goal to empower local entrepreneurs to create income or from support for the concept of scaling sectors, as recommended by the Omidyar Network in Priming the Pump.
scaling sectors?
part of our demise..? no?
The annual cost of specific disease control in the next three years is perhaps $6 billion, and another $6 billion per year for health-system expansion. The total, $12 billion per year for an expanded Global Fund, might seem unrealistically large compared to the $3 billion per year spent now. But total annual funding of $12 billion is really very modest, representing around 0.033 percent (three cents per $100) of the donor countries’ GNP. This is a tiny sum, which could be easily mobilized if donor countries were serious.

this idea.. yes.. but not about a sector.. about scaling individual people.
yes .. even 12 bill is nothing if we are clever...

20mill could model it. so people could see... believe...
For example, provision of clean water promises freedom for women and the option for girls to attend school. Meanwhile revolving funds enable women to far
see: now attend school? like in schooling the world... like in Kampala?
we free from horrendous conditions... then place people in a box.. with a belief that they aren't good enough till a piece of paper says so..

holt thinking... everyone has enough today.. nothing should be compulsory .. or touted as the ath to success

what if the only thing.. is... scale each individual... via curiosity
then you have 7bill working on those five.. plus

✜ Stephen Ransom (@ransomtech)
2/18/13 7:36 AM
@ryanbretag An “engaged”…

Less than three years ago, I graduated high school. I was a driven student who scored a 100 per cent average, served as the students’ council president and class valedictorian, earned over 16 scholarships/awards, etc. The bottom line is that I was a high achiever, but I mistakenly defined achievement in a way most do: with my GPA. It was only until a couple of years ago, when I began to question my own educational career, that I realized something profound: The academic portion of my high school life was spent in the wrong way, with cloudy motivations. I treated schooling and education synonymously. I had been directed not by my inner voice, but by societal pressures that limited my ability to foster personal creativity.
The system teaches us that if you get ‘As’ across the board, you’ll be successful. And if you fail a course, you’ll be labelled incompetent or hopeless. These pressures force students to regard education as a mere schooling tenure where the goal is to input a sufficient amount of work to output the highest possible grades. We sacrifice learning for schooling. One of my professors once said, “Writing exams isn’t a measure of intelligence or knowledge, it’s about getting inside your prof’s head to figure out what’ll be on the exam.”
I had been directed not by my inner voice, but by societal pressures that limited my ability to foster personal creativity.

Jonathan Fields (@jonathanfields)
2/18/13 7:36 AM
Am I doing the most important thing I could be doing?

“The question I ask myself like almost every day is -
‘Am I doing the most important thing I could be doing?’ Click to tweet

message her