Essay: Fonterra Grass Roots Fund's Impact On Social Innovation And Community Development.

Understanding Social Innovation and Community Development

Question:

Discuss about the Social Innovation for Community Engagement Theory.

Social innovation is the new concepts, strategies and ideas that must meet the social needs of various elements that must be formed education, working condition and community development. Social innovation strengthens and extends civil society and it includes the social process of innovation. As stated by Manzini & Coad (2015), social innovation is the complex methods of introducing the new products or services that can change basic resources, routines and authority of flows in which innovation can occur. Social innovation tries to provide a novel solution that must be effective, sustainable and efficient and this value would provide cure to the society rather than the single individual.

In this study, Fonterra organisation is selected as Fonterra provides community help to the client organisation. Fonterra Grass Roots Fund was established in the year 2014 and it provides help to improve the water and sanitation and community infrastructure, investment and community engagement (Fonterra.com 2018).  

Social innovation is the process of creating a new idea that can create a positive impact on the society. The concept of social innovation has emerged from the growing dissatisfaction from the technological emphasis in the innovation of economic area. As argued by Voorberg, Bekkers & Tummers (2015), technological innovation focuses on main profit of the organisation, whereas the social innovation concept provides emphasis on the human development, community development and empowerment of the common people. Social innovation has emerged from the result of growing challenges regarding environment, society and demography; these issues are often called as ‘wicked problems' as these issues are multifaceted, complex and associated with ranges of stakeholders. ‘Wicked problems’ are hard to solve and these are conventional in the market capitalism, climate change and resource scarcity (Moulaert 2016). Social innovation incorporates the process of doing the business through social change. As stated by Cajaiba-Santana (2014), social innovation involves in redefining the aim of the organisation around the shared value, that is fulfilling the social and environmental needs, not just the profit.

Typology of social innovation

Social innovations will help the organisation to create value for the environment and society as well and the organisations want to do the things in different ways, for primarily about the individuals like government, institutes, the private sector and civil society, on the other side, secondarily for the use of technological processes.

Social entrepreneurship is the process of making and growing the venture for non-profit or for-profit and the motivation of the entrepreneurs comes from to do the social changes. This approach of social entrepreneurship can create the change through creating the new venture. In addition, according to Choi & Majumdar (2014), the process of stating the social changes from within through establishing the organisation is called the social entrepreneurship. This approach can create alteration by providing the capabilities and resources of the established organisation. The method of inter-organisational activities to facilitate the alternative ideas, place, people and resources in order to bring out challenges is defined as social entrepreneurship approach.  This type of social entrepreneurship can create change by platforms which can support collective effort within and between new and established organisations.

Typology of Social Innovation

Fonterra Grass Roots Funds takes the initiative to sponsor the projects, ideas and initiatives that provide real impact. The community is an integral part of the business of Fonterra. Fonterra is wholly dedicated to doing good to the community people. In Dockland area of Melbourne, Fonterra is going to help Aquatek Pro Water Organisation to set up a water purifier station. Dockland area is an inner-western area of the suburb of Melbourne. In Dockland area of Melbourne has been facing the issue of poor drinkable water as sample testing showed that water is not drinkable. The common people asked time and again to the Victoria government and it brought no result. A section of the area has been drinking the impure water and some of the people are buying pure water with a high cost. This water purifier station will not be large and Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will buy readymade devices and it will seem a rather small contribution; however, it will help a large section of people to get the purified water.

In Dockland area, the people who live in the eastern area are in dire need of purified water as they are purchasing the water from the open market. The people have to purchase the water in litre basis from the market with industry price. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation has identified the need for safe drinking water as it can impact on the health of individual and on the entire community. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will make a budget at first to make out how much money does it cost to make the water purifier station and how much land does it need to establish the water purification station. At first stage, water from nearby lakes and rivers will be screened as it contains any natural contamination. The experts will then check the water through adding alum into it and this process is called coagulation. The heavy particles sit at the bottom and the experts will find the pure water. The process of filtration will also be done in order to make the water purer. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will use disinfecting chemicals in the water tank. In addition, the water will be sold in bottles and Aquatek is planning to sell the bottles with 1, 2 and 5 litres bottle packs. The water purifier station will recruit people from the nearby area of Dockland and it will provide employment to the people. The distribution channel will be simple and the water bottles will reach the customers in a smooth way.

 Water purification can play an important role to access of drinking water as safe drinking water is needed for the common people. If people have to purchase the water, it leads to getting higher the living cost. Water is the necessary thing and drinking water must be safe. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation takes the funding from Fonterra and impact of investment always presents an appealing promise. The aim of the philanthropic investment is to be gained financial returns that provide a source of economic sufficiency for the investor (Dees 2017). Aquatek Pro Water Organisation wants to have financial returns from the water purifier station through selling the water bottles to the community people. The community people need purified water and this water purified station will meet the needs of the people. Social innovation always entails the experiment and it is associated with the financial risks (Phillips et al. 2015). Therefore, Aquatek Pro Water Organisation wants to expand the business when they would see the increase in selling of the water bottles. The investors must be aware of the iron cage made by the expectation of financial returns and they can leverage financial impact through social innovation.

Social Entrepreneurship

Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will not use any technology that would emit harmful gas and the technologies would be sustainable. The technologies will consume less energy, therefore, the technologies and equipment will have a lower impact on the environment (Nicholls & Dees 2015). The bottles of Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will have reusable value and the bottles can be reused. In addition, the water purifier station will have an urban gardening where plants will provide shadow. Therefore, the whole planning of social innovation will provide protection and restore the eco-system (Habibi et al. 2014). The labelling of the water bottles will say about environmentally friendly choices.

Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will follow the ethical framework that stems from the operational principles. This water purifier station will design with benefits of the users and this water purifier station will not harm the society. The management body will understand the ecosystem and it would build for sustainability. The work process of the water purifier station will be collaborative and the collaboration will be done with the people across the nearby society.

This social innovation concept will do the social good as it would provide purified water to the common people with cheap pricing strategy and the employees will be chosen from the nearby society (El Ebrashi 2013). The employment opportunity will be provided to the people along with urban garden amidst the concrete forest. The recycle bottles will be reusable. The rising issue of inequality, interconnectedness of the communities and lowering level of trust among the people can be solved through the social innovation process.  

Political uncertainty austerity and steep competition are rapidly changing the condition of the business for social enterprises (Nicholls et al. 2015). Fonterra will fund the water purifier station at Dockland; therefore, Aquatek Pro Water Organisation will not face issue regarding investment and funding. This social entrepreneurship will face the issue of collaboration with the community. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation need to convince the people that this water purifier station will provide benefit through providing employment and purified water. If the business goes larger, this entrepreneurship venture can provide large economic input in this place. Social entrepreneurs need to work with partners and those partners values may not match with Aquatel Pro Water Organisation and the venture may face the issue of collaboration. In addition, this water purifier station may face the issue of retaining social purposes. This water purification station may face the difficulty in striking the balance between new revenue and diversification and maintain the core ethics of the water purification. Thirdly, implementation of the social entrepreneurship will need planning. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation may want to use different business model and it may clash with Fonterra. Income will be generated through commercial activities and if Fonterra will ask to do diversification of the business, Aquatek Pro Water Organisation needs to consider the risk. The focus of this social innovation should be long-term in focus as the social entrepreneurship comes from the sustainable manner. The main aim of this venture is to provide social benefit and commercialisation is the secondary. As stated by Herrera (2015), social enterprises can also deliver the commercial value. Aquatek Pro Water Organisation can opt to take additional social value to ignite the passion of social entrepreneurship.

Conclusions

It has been observed that core elements of social innovation are related to the novelty of social innovation is the new to the concept and entrepreneurs can apply this in a new way. From ideas to implementation is the same as the distinction between innovation and invention. The entrepreneurship venture must meet the social needs as the social innovation is explicitly made to meet the recognised social needs. The process of effectiveness in social innovation is effective than a solution as it helps to create measurable improvement in terms of the result. The concept of water purification station in the community will enhance the society's capacity as it will empower the people to have purified water and the employment. This water purification station will provide new relationship and role through developing the capabilities and assets through resources.

Reference List

Baldus, B.J., Voorhees, C. & Calantone, R., 2015. Online brand community engagement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Business Research, 68(5), pp.978-985.

Cajaiba-Santana, G., 2014. Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 82, pp.42-51.

Calic, G. & Mosakowski, E., 2016. Kicking off social entrepreneurship: how a sustainability orientation influences crowdfunding success. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), pp.738-767.

Choi, N. & Majumdar, S., 2014. Social entrepreneurship as an essentially contested concept: Opening a new avenue for systematic future research. Journal of business venturing, 29(3), pp.363-376.

Dees, J.G., 2017. 1 The Meaning of Social Entrepreneurship. In Case of Studies in Social Entrepreneurship and Sustainability(pp. 34-42). Routledge.

El Ebrashi, R., 2013. Social entrepreneurship theory and sustainable social impact. Social Responsibility Journal, 9(2), pp.188-209.

Fonterra. 2018. Fonterra Grass Roots Fund Australia. Available at: https://www.fonterra.com/au/en/What-we-stand-for/FonterraGrassRootsFundAustralia.html [Accessed 13 Apr. 2018].

Habibi, M.R., Laroche, M. & Richard, M.O., 2014. The roles of brand community and community engagement in building brand trust on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, pp.152-161.

Herrera, M.E.B., 2015. Creating a competitive advantage by institutionalizing corporate social innovation. Journal of Business Research, 68(7), pp.1468-1474.

Herrera, M.E.B., 2015. Creating a competitive advantage by institutionalizing corporate social innovation. Journal of Business Research, 68(7), pp.1468-1474.

Hollebeek, L.D., Juric, B. & Tang, W., 2017. Virtual brand community engagement practices: a refined typology and model. Journal of Services Marketing, 31(3), pp.204-217.

Manzini, E. & Coad, R., 2015. Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT press.

Moulaert, F., 2016. Social innovation: Institutionally embedded, territorially (re) produced. In Social innovation and territorial development (pp. 27-40). Routledge.

Nicholls, A., & Dees, J. G. 2015. Social Innovation Wright, JD. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) pp. 355-361. Oxford: Elsevier

Nicholls, A., Simon, J., Gabriel, M. & Whelan, C. eds., 2015. New frontiers in social innovation research. Springer.

Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’Regan, N. & James, P., 2015. Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: A systematic review. Group & Organization Management, 40(3), pp.428-461.

Voorberg, W.H., Bekkers, V.J. & Tummers, L.G., 2015. A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), pp.1333-1357.