Social Innovation

Social
Innovation
in Auckland
2013
This publication was prepared by Auckland Council's Research, Investigations and Monitoring Unit in partnership
with Auckland Council's Community and Cultural Strategy Unit.
The information presented in this document is provided by various sources, and content is for information only.
The opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily the opinions of Auckland Council.
Social Innovation in Auckland
Contents
Foreword............................................................................................................................................................ 5
Social innovation: an introduction.............................................................................................................. 7
The social innovation continuum............................................................................................................. 10
Its education Jim, but not as we know it.............................................................................................. 14
From little things, big things growthe story of the
Chinese New Settlers Services Trust....................................................................................................... 17
A movement for a united and prosperous Cook Islands.................................................................... 20
Improving access to the performing arts............................................................................................... 23
Housing for all? Lets do it!........................................................................................................................ 25
Community housing: an integrated approach...................................................................................... 27
Empowering people to drive innovative change.................................................................................. 31
Social innovation: empowering young people with disabilities through The Cube................... 34
Supporting community development through social enterprise..................................................... 36
Ngti Whtua rkeis proactive approach to whnau development.......................................... 39
Philanthropy: the venture capital for social innovation..................................................................... 42
Corporate social responsibility and social innovation........................................................................ 47
Reflections of a serial social entrepreneur............................................................................................. 51
The business of turning problems into solutions................................................................................. 55
Upcoming conferences................................................................................................................................ 58
Cover image: Clarks Lane footbridge opening, Hobsonville

Opposite page: Darby Street shared space
Southside Arts Festival
Foreword
It is with pleasure that I introduce this inaugural Social Innovation in Auckland report. Social
innovation is a new and emerging sector in New Zealand and one that Auckland Council is
committed to supporting as it grows and develops.
The projects and ideas presented in this publication are just some of the exciting social
innovations currently happening in Auckland. The contributors come from diverse backgrounds
and professions, but are united in their pursuit of innovative ways to tackle some of our most
pressing social challenges.
I would like to thank the contributors for their thoughtful reflections on social innovation and
for the work they are doing to achieve Aucklands vision to become the worlds most liveable
city. The Auckland Plan is Auckland's blueprint to achieve this vision, and will require community
leadership and participation in helping to deliver it.
Creating successful social and community outcomes involves people playing an active part in
designing, developing and delivering the services and projects they want and need for themselves
and their communities. Auckland Council is developing innovative new strategies to support this
like Thriving Communities our plan for supporting community-led development, better social
outcomes and strong local economies. Auckland Councils 21local boards also have a key role
to play in leading this change and are doing great work through exciting new projects like Youth
Connections a youth employment partnership between the Tindall Foundation, the Auckland
Airport Trust, the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs and Auckland Council.
There is a huge amount of talent, creativity and entrepreneurship in our diverse Auckland
communities. This report aims to celebrate the potential for social innovation and provide
a critical reflection on these emerging ideas and practices. I hope that you find the
articles thought-provoking and inspiring.
Penny Hulse
Deputy Mayor
Outdoor exercise equipment, Murphy Park playground, thuhu

Melenaite Vaka, Carrol Elliott (Mngere-thuhu Local Board Member) and Carol Lemaiu
Social innovation:
an introduction
Dr Amanda Gilbertson
Research, Investigations and Monitoring Unit, Auckland Council
In recent years social innovation has attracted

increasing attention from policy makers,
academics, practitioners and the general public.
According to the Centre for Social Innovation, the
term refers to new ideas that resolve existing
social, cultural, economic and environmental
challenges for the benefit of people and planet.1
There is, however, some disagreement about the
meaning of the term. This introduction considers
the key characteristics and history of this field of
activity to provide some context for the many
examples of social innovation that follow.
Although often presented as a

new idea, social innovation in
fact has a long history.
For some, the central characteristic of social
innovation is that it is non-institutional, grassroots or community-led. Social innovators can
operate where the private sector does not see
profit, while also avoiding the bureaucracy of the
public sector.2 They can, therefore, potentially
solve problems that the market and the state
cannot. However, not all social innovation
emerges from the community. Examples can be
found in the private sector (open-source software
and organic food), academia (pedagogical models

of childcare), and in government (new models of
public health).
Furthermore, this definition overlooks
collaboration and cross-over between sectors.
For example, in 1962, Michael Young, an
outstanding British social innovator, proposed
an Open University that would broaden
access to university education through the
use of communications technology.
The Open University began as a voluntary
distance-learning organisation and became
a public body. Another of Youngs initiatives,
Language Line, which offers telephone
interpreting services, was established as a
charitable trust in 1990 and became a
for-profit enterprise, recently sold for 25m.3
As Professor Anne de Bruins contribution to this
report highlights, cross-sector collaboration is
one key strength of social innovation.
Another potential characteristic of social
innovation is that it involves social rather
than technological processes of change new
strategies, concepts, ideas and organisations.
However, this contrast between technological
and social change overlooks the important role of
technologies such as social media in enabling
1 Centre for Social Innovation. 2012. socialinnovation.ca/about/social-innovation

2 S Hostick-Boakye and M Hothi. 2011. Grow your Own: How local authorities can support local enterprise. London: Young Foundation pp1112 at
youngfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Grow-Your-Own-How-local-authorities-can-support-social-enterprise-November-2011.pdf
3 G Mulgan, S Tucker, R Ali, and B Sanders. 2007. Social innovation: what it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. Oxford: Skoll Centre for Social
Entrepreneurship, Said Business School www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/centres/skoll/research/Documents/Social%20Innovation.pdf. OECD 2010. Social Entrepreneurship
and Social Innovation. SMEs, Entrepreneurship and Innovation. OECD publishing dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264080355-50-en
social innovators to connect with others and have

a global impact.4 The separation of technology
and society also overlooks the possibility for
social benefit in technological innovation. A good
example of technological innovation for social
benefit is Eyejuster glasses, designed in Oxford
to help people in developing countries who
cant get the glasses they need. These low-cost
glasses allow the lens power to be changed at any
time, so the glasses can be shared, fine-tuned or
changed as the eye changes.5
The most widely agreed characteristic of social
innovation is that it involves creating social
value by providing solutions to problems of a
public nature. Social innovation explicitly seeks
to meet a social need, and so improve quality
of life and life expectancy.6 This contrasts with
the primarily profit-driven motivation of most
commercial entrepreneurs, who may see social
impact as a consequence of their enterprise, but
not a main goal.
That is not to say that social innovation cannot
generate a profit. While helping others has
traditionally been seen as the domain of the
non-profit sector and making money as the
domain of the for-profit sector, social enterprises
blur the boundaries between non-profit and
for-profit. The key difference is that the explicit
goal of social entrepreneurs, and their business
mission, is positive social change, not exploiting
a market opportunity to increase personal
wealth.7 The majority of the profits of social
enterprises are usually reinvested in the business
or community to maximise contribution to the
wellbeing of society.
However, it is important to remember that social
enterprises are just one form of social innovation;
many people working in the innovation space
dont consider themselves entrepreneurs, and
many innovative programmes have no financial
or formal structure. Social innovation is a much
broader field of activity that includes a wide
range of new ideas, processes and structures.
Although often presented as a new idea, social
innovation has a long history.8
During the industrialisation and urbanisation

of the nineteenth century, social innovations
included civil society initiatives such as mutual
self-help, micro-credit, building societies,
co-operatives, trade unions, reading clubs,
and model towns and schools created by
philanthropic business leaders. In the postwar years, governments led social innovation
by developing the welfare state. In the 1960s
and 1970s social movements around ecology,
feminism and civil rights were the primary
impetus for change.9
Yet it is only in the last decade that the concept
has really taken off. A number of initiatives
have emerged in recent years to promote social
innovation and move it towards the mainstream
of public policies. The increasing focus on this
sector has been largely driven by public-spending
constraints and the desire to find alternative
ways to deliver local services.10
In the United States, a social innovation fund
that supports community-based solutions, using
a combination of public and private resources,
was launched in 2009,11 and in 2010 the US
Government established the White House Office
of Social Innovation and Civic Participation.12
In the United Kingdom, a key player in the social
innovation field is the National Endowment for
Science, Technology and the Arts, which funds and
supports innovation, including social innovation,
through research, contributions to the policy
agenda and the funding of start-up companies.13
Social innovation is also an area of growing
interest in Australia. In 2008, The Australian
Centre for Social Innovation was established
in Adelaide to identify and support innovative
people, ideas and methods that will contribute to
and accelerate positive social change.14
It is clear from the contributions to this
report that social innovation has the potential
to significantly improve the wellbeing of
Aucklanders. The challenge for Auckland will be
to build the capacity for social innovation and to
help turn good ideas into reality. This will need
to involve new change-makers and established
social sector organisations, as well as radical
change and incremental improvements.15
Walking school bus, Manukau

4
OECD 2010 Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation.
www.eyejusters.com/devworld
E Pol and S Ville. 2009. Social Innovation: Buzz word or enduring term? The Journal of Socio-Economics 38, 87885.
OECD. 2010. Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation, p191
Godin. 2012. Social Innovation: Utopias of Innovation from c.1830 to the Present. Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation, Working Paper No. 11.
B
Montral: National Institute of Scientific Research. www.csiic.ca/PDF/SocialInnovation_2012.pdf
Mulgan et al. 2007. Social innovation.
10 Hostick-Boakye & Hothi. 2011. Grow your Own, p4

11 www.nationalservice.gov/about/programs/innovation.asp
12 www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/sicp
13 www.nesta.org.uk
14 www.tacsi.org.au
15 C Seelos and J Mair. 2012. Innovation Is Not the Holy Grail. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall, 4549.
The social innovation

continuum
Professor Anne de Bruin, Director / Dr Loren Stangl, Associate
NewZealand Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship Research Centre, Massey University
The nature of innovation is changing dramatically

as economies shift from the industrial age to
the knowledge age. No longer is innovation
exclusively associated with commercially
exploitable technological products.16 Social
innovation is emerging as a critical part of
the innovation ecosystem. The focus of social
innovation is on finding solutions to local and
global social problems and creating new values
for society, a task traditionally associated with
government and non-profit organisations.
10
Social innovation is no longer

simply the preserve of the nonprofit sector; it can occur in the
public and business sectors and in
partnership across sectors.
Today, however, a growing number of social
enterprises combine a social mission with a
business model. They bridge the gap between the
for-profit and non-profit sectors.
The Kitchen is a co-working space for changemakers in Auckland
Mainstream businesses too are increasingly

tapping into the vast market opportunities that
exist to fulfil social needs and provide solutions
to societys wicked problems. To be effective,
social innovation often demands a systemic
approach. Social innovation development
processes recognise that working with
stakeholders to create value is viable and,
in many cases, critical for success.
Increasingly, innovation is driven by social and
economic wealth creation objectives. This new
era of innovation embraces a more holistic
perspective that includes social innovation as
an integral facet. Social innovation is no longer
simply the preserve of the non-profit sector; it
can occur in the public and business sectors and
in partnership across sectors.
The social innovation continuum

There is unsettled debate on the scope and
boundaries of social innovation. This ambiguity
is aptly captured by the observation: Social
innovation is a term that almost everyone likes,
but nobody is quite sure of what it means.17 We
adopt a continuum approach to encapsulate the
fluid boundaries and variability that characterises
social innovation. The essence of the social
innovation continuum is that different forms of
innovation along the continuum have a common
outcome advancing new solutions to social
problems (including environmental problems).
The social innovation continuum recognises that
social problem-driven innovation can vary. For
example, an organisations motive or mission
may be a point of difference. So innovation by
organisations with a mission focused mainly
on creating social wealth is at one end of the
continuum, while those organisations with a
mission focused mainly on creating economic
wealth is at the other end. Evidence of a social
mission is often the defining aspect of a social
enterprise. Yet not all social enterprises are
innovators. Also, traditionally, organisations have
pursued either purely social or economic motives.
But today organisations are emerging that seek
to create social and economic wealth.
Their innovative activity may be accommodated

along the continuum. The continuum can also
capture scientific and technological innovation.
For instance, high technology can offer alternative
energy solutions to environmental problems.
Social innovations often target complex
problems. The solutions to these multifaceted
problems require collaborative approaches,
collective action and partnerships that transcend
sector divides. The variety of initiatives and
partnerships being formed to tackle Aucklands
youth unemployment challenge highlight the
broad scope of socially innovative activity and
the need for comprehensive efforts to address
big social problems.
Social innovation for youth

employment
Globally, youth (15-24 years) unemployment is
high and climbing rapidly. Youth unemployment,
underemployment and disengagement from
formal learning and work can be detrimental not
only to the future outcomes of young people,
but also for social cohesion. NewZealand too
faces a grave and complex youth unemployment
challenge. In the year to June 2012, the
youth unemployment rate of 16.8 percent
was considerably higher than the overall
unemployment rate of 6.6 percent. The NEET
(Not in Employment, Education, or Training)
rate for NewZealand youth is also slightly
higher than the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development average. Ethnic
differentials in youth unemployment and
NEET are pronounced, with Mori and Pacific
youth particularly disadvantaged in the labour
market.18 Youth being disengaged from work and
education is a widespread problem that demands
innovative solutions.
Auckland has high numbers of youth compared
to the rest of New Zealand, especially among
its Mori and Pacific populations.
16 FORA. 2009. New Nature of Innovation. Report to the OECD. Copenhagen.

17 E Pol and S Ville. 2009. Social innovation: Buzz word or enduring term? Journal of Socio-Economics 38, (6), 87885.
18 N
ew Zealand Human Rights Commission. 2012. Youth employment problem: A New Zealand context, http://live.isitesoftware.co.nz/neon/documents/
Information%20about%20youth%20employment%20in%20New%20Zealand.pdf17
11
Failure to address the youth employment

challenge means that Auckland will lose this
valuable demographic dividend. The Auckland
Plan has recognised the importance of Aucklands
younger generation by putting children and
young people first. It explicitly recognises
Auckland Councils high economic and social
stake in ensuring youth engagement with
education and the labour market. For example,
it has a target to raise the proportion of school
leavers who achieve at least NCEA Level 2 from
74 percent in 2010 to 100 percent by 2020. But
achieving this target will not be easy. It requires a
multifaceted implementation pathway involving
innovative partnerships at a variety of levels.
At a regional level, the Auckland Plans Southern
Initiative19 is indicative of the concerted effort
needed to tackle complex problems like youth
underemployment. Several inter-connected
initiatives involving local boards, government
agencies, mana whenua, businesses, community
leaders and other strategic partners will
contribute to developing a multi-sector action
plan to achieve transformational change in the
area. Establishing a new governance structure
facilitated by Auckland Council is an integral
part of the Southern Initiative. Developing new
ways of working together and co-ordinating and
aligning initiatives and partnerships that can
move swiftly towards a common purpose are
often crucial to mitigating wicked problems and
can be a form of social innovation. As such, the
governance body of the Southern Initiative may
also fit along the social innovation continuum.
Overarching action, like that planned for the
Southern Initiative, must be underpinned by
complementary, smaller, partnership-based,
youth-focused or family-focused microlevel initiatives. For example, programmes of
the John Walker Find your Field of Dreams
Foundation target raising youth aspirations in
the region through sport and physical recreation,
in partnership with the business sector. More
family-oriented, community-based initiatives are
being spear-headed by COMET Auckland, which

is both a charitable trust and an Auckland Council
Controlled Organisation (CCO), including the
family learning programme and Whnau Ara Mua
Families Moving Forward.20 Such socially innovative
programmes, driven by non-profit organisations
or government-controlled organisations, sit at one
end of the social innovation continuum. At the
other end are innovations of commercially driven
organisations that solve social problems. We refer
to this type of innovation as hybrid innovation.
Hybrid innovation
The two types of innovation innovation
targeted at solving social problems and
commercially driven science and technology
innovation need not be mutually exclusive.
Hybrid innovations create economic and social
value. This resonates with the idea of creating
shared value championed by Harvard Business
Schools Michael Porter.21 He argues that society
can no longer consider social and economic goals
as polar opposites. Porter claims that future
global growth is dependent on creating economic
value through creating social value by addressing
societal needs and challenges and not merely
focusing on profit.
Technological innovations in the renewable/
alternative energy industry epitomise hybrid
innovation. Innovators in this industry are
representative of the new breed of dual purpose
innovators. Auckland-based LanzaTech is a
clean energy technology company operating
in this niche. By converting carbon monoxide
containing waste gases through a technologically
advanced process, LanzaTech provides a
solution to pollution and engages with viable
eco-effective production of low-carbon fuels.22
Innovations like the LanzaTech process result
in new, commercially viable products that
simultaneously target social problems and needs.
The outcome of their innovation is a solution
to the social problems created by a lack of
environmental sustainability.
19 See http://theplan.theaucklandplan.govt.nz/aucklands-people/#the-southern-initiative
20 See www.cometauckland.org.nz/wawcs0143753/te-whanau-ara-mua.html
21 M Porter and M Kramer. 2011. Creating Shared Value, Harvard Business Review 89 (1/2), 6277.
22 See www.lanzatech.com
12
Auckland Unleashed Summit
The essence of hybrid innovation is its

combination of commercial and social objectives.
Embracing the hybrid innovation concept
broadens the scope of social innovation.
Social innovation is multifaceted and an integral
aspect of a new innovation paradigm. The social
innovation continuum effectively captures
the range and scope of social innovation.
Simultaneous social and economic value creation

is aptly demonstrated by the emergence of
hybrid innovators and the blurred boundaries
of social innovation. Complex problems, such
as youth underemployment and environmental
challenge demand cross-sector collaboration, a
more universal appreciation of shared value and
a holistic understanding of innovation.
13
Its education Jim, but not as

we know it
Pat Snedden
Executive Chair, Manaiakalani Education Trust
There are moments in life when our balance is

tipped and the world suddenly looks different.
I had one of those moments in October 2009.
I was in charge of a major urban development
project in Glen Innes called the Tmaki
Transformation Programme (TTP) and I was
invited to the local primary school at Point
England to see what they were doing with
14
technology in their school. Expecting to see the

principal and his senior staff, I was somewhat
surprised to be in a room with seven 9 to 11 year
olds who proceeded, after an accomplished mihi
whakatau (greeting), to describe their expertise
in technology for the next 15minutes, without
notes or adult support, using an array of audiovisual aids.
Senior students from Tmaki College operate completely in the digital environment;
the first state secondary school in the country to do this
The children had to learn, on

average, 1.5 times as fast as
the average child every year for
five years to reach that point of
parity. What was truly surprising
was that the children in the
Manaiakalani Programme were
nearly there.
It was a stunning performance, not least because
all the children were of Mori or Pacific island
ethnicity, were living in one of Aucklands poorest
state housing areas and attending a decile one
school. In thirty years of direct involvement
in community development, treaty work and
business with Mori and Pacific peoples, I had
never seen anything so impressive.
As if to emphasise this overturning of
expectation, the youngest girl in the group,
a beautifully articulate Tongan, explained to
me that their teacher had come to school
pregnant that year. The principal had advertised
for a replacement without success until her
class made an unusual request. Would it be
possible, they asked, for them to advertise for
their replacement teacher? The answer was
positive and they proceeded to create a movie
advertisement, describing who they were, what
they were good at and what they were looking
for in a teacher. These 10 and 11 year olds
attracted a large number of applicants, both
nationally and internationally. As I sat with
them in the classroom, they showed me a clip
of a woman pitching to them her qualifications
for the job and suggesting that if they liked
her they should recommend that the principal
employ her. On the day of my visit, she was
teaching in the classroom.
This was not school as I remembered it. The
students expertise, as I was later to discover,
was not the result of cherry-picking the best
students to appear before local influence brokers.
This was a genuine cross-section of children,
all having auditioned to become Point England
ambassadors to tell others how they engaged in
learning in that school. It was a revolution.
Russell Burt, principal for 17 years and teacher

at the school for more than 20years, then
explained the leap in learning outcomes in
reading and numeracy that were being achieved
in the seven schools in the local Tmaki cluster
due to the Manaiakalani Programme. Children
in the cluster arrived at school with an average
learning age of three years; the national average
learning age at the start of school is five years.
As Russell explained, if Tmaki children were
to reach the average NewZealand educational
achievement in reading and numeracy they
needed to learn fast. In sum, the children had
to learn, on average, 1.5 times as fast as the
average child every year for five years to reach
that point of parity. What was truly surprising, as
Russell took me through the results, was that the
children in the Manaiakalani Programme were
nearly there.
Whats more, all the participating schools
had experienced increased attendance levels,
greatly reduced truancy rates and a sharp
improvement in on-task behaviour as students
became more engaged.
The long tail of educational underachievement of
Mori and Pacific children was genuinely being
shortened. Could it be true?
I decided to check this out and invited all the
local school principals to a meeting. Everyone
turned up and the answer to my question: Is this
the real deal? was an unequivocal yes. Why
arent you all doing more of it?, I then asked.
There were two reasons, they explained.
Changing the teaching methodology
to embrace e-learning and securing the
technology were barriers to a Tmaki-wide
implementation. If they could meet these
challenges, there could be widespread support
in the cluster for full implementation.
TTP decided to meet this challenge.
15
Fast forward to school year 2012. We now have

nine schools operating with 1:1 netbooks23 (1,500
children), all financed by parents with an average
income of $19,000 a year for each adult. These
families have invested a $40 deposit and are
paying $3.50 a week over three years to fund
their childs computer. Two more schools have
joined this year.
Last year we formed the Manaiakalani

Education Trust. Our job is to ensure that these
schools have the resources they need to be at
the front of this positive learning wave. The
central vision of this Manaiakalani cluster is to
make digital citizens of these children and to
enable them to access their learning anywhere,
anytime and at any pace.
We have raised money to start a wireless

network for the whole of the Tmaki area
(Glen Innes, Point England and Panmure) that is
now 25 percent complete. We have professional
development around e-learning available to
teachers in all participating schools. We are
progressing to common IT infrastructure in
the cluster so there is a single pipeline from
all primary schools and intermediate schools
to the secondary school working off the same
technology base.
This approach has directly improved the

childrens engagement and educational results.
Teachers have raised their students capability
to read, write, think, listen and speak. They have
also supported students to publish their digital
work locally, nationally and internationally using
Web 2.0 technology.
This year Tamki College, the only secondary

school in the Manaiakalani Programme, became
the first low-decile state secondary school to
go fully digital. Each of the more than 700
students operates off the netbook for their
learning. Remember that this is happening in
an environment that, when measured by all
external socio-economic metrics, is profoundly
challenged. The Tmaki area has NewZealands
oldest state housing community.
At its heart, the Manaiakalani Programme is an
inside-out transformation undertaken by the
Tmaki community. The parents involved, when
faced with the prospect of dire educational
outcomes for their children, responded to school
leadership to change those outcomes. This
process has been on a slow burn since 2001, but
has received successive boosts of government
money for learning improvement since 2002.
When the digital world exploded in 2005 with
YouTube and other social media, the students in
Tmaki adopted this new world with relish.
23 A small and inexpensive laptop, primarily for internet use.
16
Today, three years on from my first encounter,

the success of the Manaiakalani Programme
has come in large measure from the ability to
coalesce a new kind of partnership that includes
government departments, community, whnau,
schools, commerce, volunteers, philanthropists
and local government. The results are astonishing
and evidence of performance is currently being
gathered and evaluated by Auckland UniServices
and the Woolf Fisher Research Centre under the
guidance of Professor Stuart McNaughton.
By the 2013 school year we expect to have
25,000 children in 11schools participating in the
Manaiakalani Programme, with 1,750 of them on
1:1netbooks. Not a single family in Tmaki with
a child in any of the Manaiakalani Cluster Schools
has declined to invest in their childs future.
From little things, big things grow

the story of the Chinese
New Settlers Services Trust
Jenny Wang, QSM
Executive Director, Chinese New Settlers Services Trust (CNSST)
I came to NewZealand from China with my

husband and 11-year old son in November 1994.
In China, I was a high school teacher, a university
lecturer and a government officer. After arriving
in NewZealand, I ran a small business in South
Auckland for two years and then studied English
from beginners level before graduating from
the Manukau Institute of Technology as a social
worker in 1999. With my familys great help,
I have been working extremely hard with the
local migrant community for the past two
decades. At the beginning of 2008, I was
honoured with the Queens Service Medal for
my contribution and services to the local Asian
migrant community.
The trust establishment meeting was held at the

Papatoetoe Town Hall on 17October 1998 and
we started regular programmes at the Depot
Papatoetoe Community Centre. Every Saturday,
more than 100 Chinese seniors, children, youth
and new migrants from local communities
dropped into the centre to participate in our
cultural learning programmes. These included
English courses for newcomers, Chinese language
and arts courses for local Asian children, Tai Chi
and other cultural and social activities for seniors
and the general public, and community education
and settlement workshops for new migrant
families covering topics ranging from taxation
to how to deal with refuse.
During the late 1980s and early 1990s, many

Asian migrants arrived in NewZealand. This
group encountered numerous problems in their
initial settlement period, and there was little
appropriate assistance available to them from
existing services. This lack of support made it
more difficult for new arrivals from Asia to settle
into their local communities and slowed down
their integration into wider NewZealand society.
Today, the trust offers culturally and linguistically

appropriate services to more than 12,000 Asian
migrants every year. These services include
social work and counselling, employment and
enterprise, education and settlement, social
enterprise (including cultural learning and small
business accounting), the Asian senior knitting
club and cultural events in the local community.
From 2009, all our social services and community
programmes were extended to the local Korean
migrant community under the name of Asian
Community Services Trust. CNSST was approved
by Child, Youth and Family Services as a
community service provider in 2002 and by the
New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants
as an Approved Training Organisation in 2010.
In 1998, together with a group of new migrant

volunteers who came from China, Taiwan and
other Asian countries, I established CNSST
to assist Asian migrants to settle well in
NewZealand. I drafted a proposal that included
the trusts constitution and philosophies, and it
was approved by the first Board of the Trust at
our first office my home garage.
17
Learning through experience, Long Bay Regional Park
CNSSTs current strategic goal is to develop as a

social enterprise that not only meets the needs
of the community but does so in an economically
sustainable way. We are also committed to
reducing social needs over the long term.
In recent years, our social enterprise focus has
been on cultural and community-related projects.
We are confident we can deliver, as we understand
the needs of our communities and have developed
a reputation for delivering to those communities.
For example, we have identified a range of social
issues from our work experience with local
18
Asian seniors. These include social isolation and

loneliness, a lack of cultural support for those
who have no family in NewZealand, language
difficulties and cultural barriers that prevent
participation in local communities, transportation
and affordable housing. To resolve these issues,
the CNSST Board is planning to be involved
in developing social housing for Asian seniors
and providing them with a range of culturally
appropriate services. By building suitable social
housing, the social needs of this demographic
may be reduced in the long term.
Social innovation provides us

with better ways to respond to
social issues. Social innovation
occurs when the community
encounters social problems
and then leads the process of
developing a response to these
pressing unmet needs.
Social enterprise is quite a new concept for
practitioners and government in NewZealand.
We definitely see the concept of social enterprise
as an innovative way of making non-governmental
organisations more independent and resilient.
For instance, we see our CNSST Cultural Learning
Centre as a successful social enterprise initiative.
When the organisation was first established in
1998, it was driven by a mission and philosophy
of A Brighter Future for You. We aimed to meet
the need of young migrant parents to preserve
their childrens Chinese language and cultural
understanding.
The number of students at our Cultural Learning
Centre has increased from 16 in 1998 to more
than 1,800 in 2012. The number of cultural
programmes we run has increased from one
Chinese class in Papatoetoe to more than 300
classes at 10 locations across Auckland and
Wellington. Subjects include Chinese language,
Chinese painting and calligraphy, martial arts
(including Kung Fu), mathematics and traditional
dance and music. The centres self-funded annual
turnover increased from $500 in 1998 to about
$500,000 in 2011, and the programmes benefit
more than 2,000 local Chinese and non-Chinese
children and young people every year.
Yet we are facing a number of challenges.

For example, it can be difficult to achieve a balance
between caring for people and making money.
The absence of government policy on social
enterprise also affects the way we operate.
A social innovation policy could support social
enterprises to develop their commercial expertise
and provide policy advice and seed funding for
feasible and sustainable projects.
Based on my experience with CNSST and my
practice as a social worker, I think that social
innovation provides us with better ways to
respond to social issues. Social innovation occurs
when the community encounters social problems
and then leads the process of developing a
response to these pressing unmet needs. However,
we believe that local and central government must
support social innovation if it is to help achieve the
goal of sustainable, long-term social wellbeing.
CNSST is meeting unmet needs today and
reducing the social problems of tomorrow.
Our community is lucky to have social
entrepreneurs who share their time and energy
to solve social problems.
19
A movement for a united and

prosperous Cook Islands
Ina Michael
Chief Executive, Cook Islands Development Agency NewZealand (CIDANZ)
Pacific cultures are increasingly important to the

way NewZealanders see themselves.
The Cook Islands consists of 15 distinct island
groups. These distinctions remain important
in NewZealand where Cook Islanders have
tended to form communities based on their
island group of origin, commonly referred to as
vakas. While these differences are important in
the maintenance of the diversity of Cook Island
identities, a shared vision and goal is essential to
respond to the poor education, employment and
health outcomes experienced by Cook Islanders
in NewZealand.
In 2001, a group of community leaders from the
Cook Islands, including the then Prime Minister
of the Cook Islands Dr Terepai Maoate, met and
recognised the need to unite the Cook Islands
community living in NewZealand in a way
that would bring people, energy and resources
together under one umbrella organisation. In
2012, the vision is still the same, but a new
plan, structure, leadership and trading name is
in play the Cook Islands Development Agency
NewZealand (CIDANZ).
Since July 2011, CIDANZ have developed an
ambitious plan to introduce a range of one
branded social enterprises and services as a way
to make CIDANZ self-funding and sustainable.
The one brand is symbolic because it is
divinely inspired and centred, is aligned to the
Trusts vision of a unified and prosperous Cook
Islands and translates well into the legal name
of the Trust the Cook Islands Taokotaianga
Charitable Trust.
20
Vital to CIDANZs success is community

ownership and participation, where those
most closely connected to the challenges are
intimately involved in the development and
delivery of solutions. CIDANZ champions a
deliberate community-led approach to its
development. It asks the question: If we dont
do it for ourselves, who will?
At the heart of these projects is

an organisation created to bring
the Cook Islands community
together as one.
CIDANZ recognises the value of its cultural
identity, and cares deeply enough to do
something about maintaining it while navigating
new ways of doing things. It looks to its people
to offer expertise and traditional knowledge and
to others not of Pacific origin willing to help
design a new and different path. Aucklands
Cook Islands community possesses tremendous
social capital, and this will play an important role
in shaping our future and our contributions to
Auckland as the worlds most liveable city.
Captured in our plans are efforts to rejuvenate
Cook Islands language through a range of
activities including the inaugural National
Cook Islands Language week and the inaugural
oneCOOKISLANDS awards evening. Then
there is the oneCHILD Initiative that supports
Cook Islands Early Childcare Education (ECE)
providers, together with the Ministry of Education
and the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs.
The goal of both ministries is to improve not only

ECE uptake and accessibility, but also to support
language revival.
The oneCHILD Initiative is the first of its kind
for the Cook Islands community and articulates
our communitys desire to co-produce and
support solutions to our challenges. CIDANZ
is developing two sites close to Auckland
International Airport in the heart of the largest
Pacific population in the world. The oneVILLAGE
Hub is a social enterprise project dedicated to
cultural tourism and to delivering employment
and training opportunities. The profits will be
reinvested in the organisation and into other
innovative and value-added social enterprise
start-ups that create more revenue and jobs
for the local community. The oneCOMMUNITY
centre is a community innovation hub that
allows diverse ethnic community groups to
explore community development and innovation.
The best ideas go through an incubation process.
At the heart of these projects is an organisation

created to bring the Cook Islands community
together. We believe that this approach
integrates Pacific peoples, iwi and the wider
community by delivering significant community
outcomes and long-term benefits in terms of
jobs, education and community wellbeing.
As an organisation, CIDANZ is still in the early
stages of its development. Our dream is to
see the CIDANZ model grow into a genuinely
community owned and run organisation that
is an innovative and self-sustaining employer
in the heart of South Auckland. We believe
that community and commerce working in
tandem will sustainably deliver benefits to
the Cook Islands community and beyond.
Attendees at the inaugural oneCOOKISLANDS awards evening held on 10 August 2012 at the Dream Centre, Manukau
21
22
Checkout Chicks: The Musical, Next Big Thing Festival, 2012
Improving access to the

performing arts
Whetu Silver
/ Lynne Cardy
Youth Arts Co-ordinator
Associate Director, Auckland Theatre Company
The Big House, a unique immersive performance

experience, has collaboration at its heart. It is an
intimate exploration of identity, a celebration
of youth and an examination of excess. It is a
good example of Auckland Theatre Companys
(ATC) innovative practice, involving not
only collaboration with other emerging arts
organisations, but also a responsive and dynamic
approach to engage with young people and the
wider community.
The Big House will be a moving and provocative
encounter, staged in a large suburban house in
Auckland for a performance season of 12 nights
in July and August 2013. The audience is invited
into the lives of NewZealand teenagers to
explore their relationships with alcohol. It will
delve into the delicious reckless abandon that
drives young people and its effects the best
of times, and the worst of times.
It has embraced an innovative

approach to welcome people
of all ages and from all walks
of life to engage with the
performing arts.
ATCs social innovation lies primarily in two

initiatives ATC Education and ATC Participate.
Both initiatives are involved in the production of
The Big House. ATC Education is highly regarded
nationally for its success in improving young
peoples participation in the performing arts
through a school matinee programme, curriculum
development, an ambassador programme, school
visits, and workshops and teacher workshops.
The programme is industry focused, and gives
young people the opportunity to engage with
practising professionals. The pivotal role of
their youth arts co-ordinator ensures that
ATC is responsive to the particular interests of
Aucklands young people.
The ATC Participate programme was launched
last year to break down the barriers that
prevent community engagement with the arts.
It has embraced an innovative approach to
welcome people of all ages and from all walks
of life to engage with the performing arts. Its
programming remains flexible to respond to
community need, and meeting opportunities
provided by local events and groups. Developing
partnerships with other organisations enables
engagement with creative activities that are long
lasting for the participant.
The performance is a collaboration between

ATC and the PlayGround Collective, and is
being developed with participation from target
community youth groups and emerging actors.
Each participant will bring their memories,
concerns and experiences to explore the
questions raised about alcohol.
23
24
May Road housing development, Mount Roskill
Housing for all? Lets do it!
Campbell Roberts
National Director, The Salvation Army Social Policy and Parliamentary Relations Unit
Is there a more wonderful place than Auckland?

Auckland has physical beauty and economic
strength. Add to that the diversity of its people
and we have all the ingredients of a truly great
city. Yet not everyone experiences the blessings
of Auckland equally.
My journey in this city started 30 years ago when
I was asked to investigate how The Salvation
Army might further contribute to the fabric
of the Auckland community. Setting up home
in Otara, my work for the first few months
consisted of talking to people and learning what
life was like in South Auckland. I saw many
positives while meeting plenty of creative,
hardworking people doing their part to make the
city a better place.
Alongside those people Auckland was providing
well for, however, were others who were not
sharing the benefits of the city, and whose
circumstances prevented them from fully
contributing as citizens. The primary reason
for this was an inability to find affordable, safe
and secure housing. Housing is a vital piece of
community infrastructure, and essential if a city
and its population are to thrive. It was clear to
me then, as now, that a lack of adequate housing
was hindering Aucklanders health and prosperity.
I discovered families living semi-permanently
in emergency housing or camping grounds.
Some spent nights in their car because no other
accommodation options were available.
As I saw the plight of some

Aucklanders, a vision started to
emerge of social innovation that
would make a difference to the
citys housing woes.
Others struggled to pay high rents, and many
were living in poor-quality accommodation that
presented risks to the health and wellbeing of
their families.
As I saw the plight of some Aucklanders, a vision
started to emerge of social innovation that would
make a difference to the citys housing woes
social innovation to build neighbourhoods where
everyone is housed in ways that enable them to
enjoy what their city has to offer and where they
can give back to strengthen it further.
On the journey to secure that vision, The
Salvation Army took over four emergency
houses previously managed by the former
Papakura District Council. Each house had
four families living in it. The four houses soon
became 12houses there was an unending
housing need. Kitchens and bathrooms designed
to accommodate one family were stretched to
the limits. Making it work required tolerance,
patience and respect. I came to admire the
courage and fortitude of the families and their
ability to make do. I also learnt from them ways
in which things could change.
25
As time passed, it became clear that we need

to co-operate with other organisations and
agencies. In the NewZealand Housing Network,
I found strong partners such as Monte Cecilia
House, the Auckland Tenants Association, and
the Auckland District Council of Social Services.
Through this network, housing was offered and
advocacy and action taken to urge local and
national government to take stronger action in
housing provision. Slowly, together, we built a
bridge of co-operation.
It was exciting to be part of the creation of new
bodies and help others take on different roles.
A NewZealand branch of the international
organisation Habitat for Humanity formed and
offered house-building options for low-income
people. With the former Manukau City Council,
we also provided funding to help develop
Manukau House, an innovative house-building
scheme developed by two social entrepreneurs.
Working with Stephen Tindall of the Tindall
Foundation and others, the NewZealand
Housing Foundation was formed to look at
creating affordable, quality home ownership.
The foundation has gone on to become a major
supplier of affordable housing, with innovative
funding schemes and neighbourhood options.
It became clear that fresh policy options were
needed. In 2004, The Salvation Army formed
the Social Policy and Parliamentary Unit in
Auckland and I was appointed as its first director.
It has become a major goal of our unit to
encourage policy and solutions that lead to a
more adequate housing supply in Auckland. The
units staff work collaboratively with Community
Housing Aotearoa, various central and local
government working parties, and organisations
like the Centre for Housing Research in Aotearoa/
NewZealand.
26
Innovation in the community sector over

recent years has led to an increased supply
of community and emergency housing,
better research on the needs of housingdeprived households, the introduction of some
government policies to improve the housing
situation, better connections with local and
central government to develop housing
solutions and stronger advocacy for families
in housing need.
Yet while we have seen some gains, achieving
the overall vision of affordable and safe housing
for all Aucklanders has slipped further out of
reach. Today, the housing situation for many
Aucklanders is dire. Improving this situation will
require even bolder visionary policies.
There can be few challenges

in Auckland that afford
such a fertile field for social
entrepreneurship than achieving
the vision of housing all
Aucklanders well.
Securing an adequate and equitable housing
infrastructure for Auckland cannot be
accomplished by doing what we have always
done, or even by doing a little more than
we have always done. Housing in Auckland
needs a seismic shift in direction, innovation
and invention. Further, ensuring adequate
housing for all Aucklanders is far more than any
sector can achieve on its own. It demands the
combined efforts of social entrepreneurship from
government, local government, and from across
the private and community sector.
There can be few challenges in Auckland
that afford such a fertile field for social
entrepreneurship than achieving the vision of
housing all Aucklanders well. There is also no
better time to achieve this vision than in these
early years of Auckland Council. I firmly believe
that Auckland has the required combination of
talent and resources to make this happen.
Construction industry training, Unitec
Community housing:
an integrated approach
Charles MacCulloch
Programme Coordinator, Auckland Community Housing Providers Network
The Auckland Community Housing Network is a

group of 10community housing organisations.
We work together to build more houses, but also
to provide more housing choice, find innovative
ways to finance and manage affordable rentals,
facilitate positive community outcomes, build
partnerships between social support services
and clients, progress people into appropriate
housing solutions and empower individuals and
communities to control and improve their lives.
Achieving a sense of belonging and participation
in the community we live in is something most
of us strive for. Yet being the best we can be
also requires that we can pay the rent or the
mortgage on our homes. For many households,

this is becoming more and more difficult as
Auckland confronts a housing crisis and the
crisis of community that inevitably goes with
it. A greater number of people are telling us
that the cost of rental accommodation and
home ownership is now beyond their means.
Low-wage and medium-wage families are
struggling to make ends meet and their housing
choices are becoming more limited. While the
housing affordability crisis impacts us all, some
experience its negative impacts more than
others. Our communities, neighbours, families
and friends all feel it when accommodation costs
keep rising.
27
The Community of Refuge Trust (CORT),24 whose

goal is good homes for all, is a network member
with 30years experience supporting low-income
clients. CORT provides security of tenure to
people who have felt like they were part of the
flotsam and jetsam of society washed up and
beached.25 CORT has a proud record of tenant
participation in its day-to-day business and
works closely with its local community in central
Auckland. They are also Aucklands first housing
provider accredited by the Quality Improvement
Council of Australia, which has evaluated and
certified CORTs practices and performance
against a set of national standards.
The Monte Cecilia Housing Trust is another
community organisation that has been
supporting low-income families experiencing
or facing homelessness for 30years. Their
innovative service delivery model gives low
income families, with a serious housing need,
access to safe and affordable emergency
housing for a short time, typically 3-24 months.
During this time, families contribute to a
savings programme, develop skills in household
management and benefit from comprehensive
family support services. This means families
can stabilise their living situation, overcome
their immediate challenges and make plans
for their future.
Habitat for Humanity Auckland is also a network
member. Globally, Habitat for Humanity
completed its 500,000th new home in 2012.
Habitat also offers the A Brush with Kindness
programme that tackles minor repairs and damp
problems and adapts homes to suit changing
physical health needs, so improving access to,
and the liveability of, existing homes.
In Auckland, Habitat for Humanity continues
to build houses but at a much slower rate than
previous years. This is a result of increasing
land and compliance costs rather than a lack of
families needing homes. One Auckland couple
who lived in a series of cramped rental units
24 www.cort.org.nz
25 MH, one of CORTs longstanding tenants
26 www.socialhousingunit.govt.nz
28
for several years reflected on the opportunity

Habitat for Humanity gave them in this way:
We would not have been able to achieve the
same level of connection with people if we had
not owned our own home. The kids felt safe and
secure and have been happy and healthy, the
whole family is involved with community work
and thrives because of Habitat.
The importance of safe, warm, affordable housing
cannot be underestimated. Housing is a major
user of land, a source of employment, and a
significant investment. Housing influences the
physical and social environment, and is key to
achieving a communitys sense of wellbeing.
The issues contributing to the affordable
housing crisis in Auckland are complex and
inter-connected. For the Auckland Community
Housing Providers Network, and for all
community housing organisations, working in
partnership with central government, Auckland
Council and social service providers to build more
affordable housing is more important than ever.
With more structured processes and defined
targets and strategies in place, our ability to
produce more housing and improve peoples
circumstances will increase considerably.
Innovation is needed more than ever in an
environment characterised by increasing pressure
on the housing system, high demand by lowincome households and a low supply of housing.
The governments Social Housing Unit26 is
attempting to draw in and grow resources from
the network and other not-for-profits to increase
the supply of affordable rentals. Emphasis has
been placed on increasing the capacity and
diversity of the social housing sector so it can
deliver a greater diversity of products and build
more housing. Meanwhile, Housing NewZealand
allocates access to housing to those in greatest
need. Innovation in the sector will need to focus
on improving consumer access to social housing
by ensuring that the growing not-for-profit
sector and state housing work well together.
Keni Lesatele, Community of Refuge Trust Housing Worker and Harold Henare at a staff and tenant BBQ, April 2012
Innovation is needed more

than ever in an environment
characterised by increasing
pressure on the housing system,
high demand by low-income
households and a low supply
of housing.
Access to social housing is of immediate
concern to those living in unaffordable,
inappropriate housing, but also to schools,
residents, councils, the not-for-profit sector
and government. Achieving more co-ordination
and better integrated access systems across
social housing providers is a necessary area for
research and development. Housing application
and allocation systems that consider all locally
available housing will provide better social,
cultural and community outcomes.
Innovation in the integration of housing registers

and information systems will mean greater
collaboration between housing providers and
better decision-making. Better choices translate
to a reduced waiting time for a house, faster
access to more appropriate housing, and greater
transparency and satisfaction in the allocation
process. Ultimately, achieving better household
choices leads to better control for the consumer,
which in turn results in more sustainable and
enduring outcomes for the individual, the
household and the community.
29
30
The KoAwatea Building
Empowering people to drive

innovative change
Professor Jonathon Gray
Clinical Director, KoAwatea
Five years ago, Geraint Martin, CEO of Counties

Manukau Health (CMH), came up with a bold
and brave idea to develop a centre dedicated to
healthcare improvement and innovation.
Such a centre was necessary, Geraint believed, to
support the development of innovative solutions
to the health challenges Counties Manukau
faced: increasing rates of diabetes, obesity
and heart disease in an ageing and growing
population.
This state-of-the-art centre was intended to
support CMHs aim of improving the health
of the population, enhancing the patient care
experience, and reducing or at least controlling
the per capita cost of care. It was hoped that the
organisation would become the best healthcare
system in Australasia by 2015.
I came to CMH in 2010 to work with Geraint
to make this vision a reality. After further
discussion and a lot of planning, KoAwatea,
which means dawning of the first light, opened
its doors on 21 June 2011. Eighteen months on,
we now provide health system improvement;
quality improvement; workforce and leadership
capability; research, knowledge and information
management; and a vibrant KoAwatea Centre
for on-site learning.
A new way of thinking

We must improve the health of our population,
not only for reasons of equity, but also for
the long-term viability of our health services.
I believe the following changes are necessary
in the health sector:
we need to be more productive and
self-reliant
we need to improve health services to patients
by reducing harm, improving quality, reducing
errors and improving the patient experience
we need to act within a budget that is not
growing at the same rate as our population or
the demand for health services
we need to redesign our health services to
provide more community-based care
we need to create a culture where innovative
thinking and ideas can flourish.
By partnering more closely with other agencies,
and by developing the very best practice for
patient care in hospitals and at primary-care
level, we can substantially reduce costs and
improve patient care and experience while
improving the general health of our population.
31
Investing in people, knowledge

and education
The best way to prepare for the future is to
invest in and equip our staff, students and
community with the skills they need to plan
and deliver twenty-first century healthcare.
KoAwatea has partnered with Auckland
University of Technology, Manukau Institute
of Technology, the University of Auckland,
the Institute for Healthcare Improvement
(IHI) in Boston, Public Health Wales and
Sir Muir Gray, among others. These local
and international relationships are helping
us to transform the sector.
In August 2012, KoAwatea launched its Student
Chapter a local branch of the IHI Open School
creating a forum for like-minded students to
interact and develop skills in patient safety and
quality improvement. Students are equipped to
network with fellow students in similar chapters
around the world to gain access to online courses
and learning material, and to build marketable
skills for their future.
IHI is working with KoAwatea to provide a range
of courses and activities designed to enable
individuals and District Health Boards (DHBs)
around the country to innovate together, and to
collaborate on the rewarding work of improving
health and healthcare. We are also nurturing,
supporting, and upskilling our leaders of today
and the future with the soon-to-be-launched
KoAwatea Leadership Academy, a one-year
programme that will provide our people with
the skills, knowledge, support and resources they
need to lead sustainable and effective healthcare
improvement.
Innovation in collaboration
The healthcare system at CMH is full of great
pockets of expertise. The only problem is that its
people work in silos. This is starting to change
as people realise the enormous potential and
opportunities that collaboration brings. We
are starting to see the health sector working
with patients, families, and non-health related
businesses. All have valuable insights to offer.
32
The 20,000 Days Campaign and Target CLAB

Zero are examples of successful collaborations
in action. The 20,000 Days Campaign aims
to reduce hospital demand by 20,000 days
by keeping people well in the community. By
breaking down the barriers between secondary
and primary healthcare services, thousands
of hospital days have been saved since the
campaign began in July 2012.
We can transform healthcare in

this country by creating a culture
that harnesses all the wonderful
enthusiasm, energy, ideas and
positivity of the great people
who work in healthcare.
Target CLAB Zero, a national initiative, aims to
reduce the incidence of central line associated
bacteraemia (blood stream infections caused
by central line catheters) in intensive care units
around the country to almost zero (<1 in a
1000 line days) by 31 March 2013. No incidents
of central line infections were reported in
NewZealand during September 2012 a huge
achievement given that there were between
four and seven central line infections a month
nationally before Target CLAB Zero began. Target
CLAB Zero has enabled all DHBs to work together
and put in place a standardised measurement
system so that everyone knows how to measure
central line infections and the best practice for
preventing them. For the first time, we are all
speaking a common language about this issue.
Innovation in technology
Technology is transforming healthcare in many
ways and KoAwatea is at the forefront of this
powerful development. Social media has made
it easier to reach people around the globe, with
patients accessing information and networking
with communities online.
While we are currently exploring the potential
that social media has to offer, KoAwatea is using
the latest technology, such as webinars, to reach
and talk with health professionals from around
the country and overseas.
Art students from De La Salle College in Mangere present a series of words that symbolise KoAwatea
KoAwateas growing reputation for top

quality e-learning options was recognised
when eCampus an online tool that provides
interactive courses and educational videos hit
a new high of 4,600 users, pushing CMH into
new territory for DHBs nationally. Through
eCampus, staff and students get simulation and
patient safety training that improves services and
reduces adverse events, making a big difference
to patient outcomes.
The future
I believe we can transform healthcare in this
country by creating a culture that harnesses
all the wonderful enthusiasm, energy, ideas
and positivity of the great people who work in
healthcare. Collaboration will continue to play
a vital role as we open our minds to different
perspectives and ways of thinking.
33
Social innovation: empowering

young people with disabilities
through The Cube
Sonia Thursby
CEO, Yes Disability Resource Centre
The Yes Disability Resource Centre (Yes) is

a champion of The Cube, an innovative new
initiative developed in collaboration with eight
partners in the social and recreation service
provider sector. The Cube has developed a
responsive model of working together that is
improving social and recreational disability
services, and access to these services for young
people in Auckland. The Cube gives young people
with disabilities real opportunity for social
change by supporting them to become equal
partners around the table. Young people are no
longer just receivers of services; they become
designers and deliverers of services that meet
their needs.
Innovation often starts from a simple
conversation and a couple of champions willing
to take a risk on a new idea. With The Cube,
Cam Calkoen (a young person with a disability)
and Sonia Thursby (CEO of Yes Disability
Resource Centre) spoke about a lack of access
to services for young people and the issues that
arose from this. They talked about the need
for a first stop shop, for stronger partnerships
between youth service providers and for greater
cohesion within the youth disability sector.
The new generation of young people wanted
to be part of the development of the services
they received, and to receive information about
services in a timely, easily accessible way.
The importance of young people being a part
of this new development was recognised from
day one. A workshop was held with three youth
workers and nine young people who use a range
of disability services. The group was asked to
discuss the strengths, weaknesses and potential
34
means of improving the disability services

available to them, the ways they communicate
with people about their needs and how they
choose services.
Consultation with organisations within the
youth/disability sector revealed that some had
no paid staff and were struggling in these difficult
financial times to provide their very valuable
services. The Cube sought to meet the needs of
the young people and the organisations.
One challenge of innovation is finding the funding
to invest in something new and unproven. The
Cube has been fortunate to receive funding from
the Yes Disability Resource Centre, the Todd
Foundation and the ASB Community Trust Youth
Health and Development Fund. The Cube is the
only youth with disabilities organisation that the
Ministry of Youth Development has funded and
continues to fund.
The Cube provides a space for innovation and an
opportunity to pilot projects and ideas that meet
the needs of young people with disabilities.
Whether these ideas come from young people
themselves or from partners of The Cube, the
organisation provides space to develop these
ideas further. Two successful initiatives have
come out of this process: The Really Big Kinda
Massive Meet Up and YesICan workshops.
Jade Farrar and Cameron Calkoen, young people
with disabilities, worked to put on an epic
networking event for young people of any ability,
people with disabilities, family, whnau and
service providers, to ultimately expand everyones
social attitudes and behaviours and to increase
The Cube Youth Engagement Group experiences a touch compass workshop during the Cube Epic Experiences Day
opportunities for disabled people. Dubbed The

Really Big Kinda Massive Meet Up, these events
are full of inspiration, information and innovation.
These are networking events involving companies
and organisations that work with disabled and
non-disabled people. The Cube incubated and
piloted this idea an idea that now gets funding
from the Ministry of Social Development.
The new generation of young

people wanted to be part of the
development of the services
they received, and to receive
information about services in a
timely, easily accessible way.
YesICan is an intensive training programme of
workshops that help young people to successfully
contribute to the community around them,
develop their skills and motivation and increase
their self-esteem, personal confidence and
leadership skills. This innovative training was
piloted through The Cube with great success.
The Cube aims to support young people and
their families to participate in education,
health, recreation and employment activities,
so contributing to the sense of belonging and
pride young people and their families feel for
their community. The Cube also seeks to enable

young people with disabilities to make informed
individual choices to improve their life prospects.
This is achieved through collaborative, innovative
and inclusive service provision.
The key innovation of The Cube is getting
young people actively engaged and involved
in developing and delivering the new service
model. The Cube Youth Engagement Group
meets monthly to identify and work on projects
that will make a difference for young people
with disabilities. Other areas of innovation
include a flexible and responsive service model
that continues to evolve, the promotion of
collaborative partnerships between services
to create best practice, and the use of social
media such as Facebook to improve access to
information about disability services and events.27
The Cube is a high-performing, flexible and
innovative organisation and is a model that
can be duplicated throughout NewZealand to
provide the best support for disabled young
NewZealanders. The model can also be used
for a wide range of similar organisations and
in different sized communities. Our goal of
making the model transferrable and scalable is
becoming more of a reality as we start to support
organisations in other parts of NewZealand.
27 www.facebook.com/TheCubeNZ
35
Supporting community
development through
social enterprise
Joel Umali
Community Development and Safety, Auckland Council
Prior to moving to NewZealand from the

Philippines four years ago, I was heavily involved
in development work in the areas of microfinance, information communications technology
for development, gender and development and
social policy formulation. These experiences
taught me much about social innovation,
36
and I am able to use my understanding of this

topic in my current role to support and facilitate
the development of social enterprises.
We started our social enterprise programme
with the local boards of the Waitemat and
Maungakiekie-Tmaki areas by taking a snapshot
have more mature start-up social enterprises

while Maungakiekie-Tmakis social ventures
are generally new, enterprising non-profit
organisations. Second, in both areas respondents
define social enterprise in different ways. About
half said social enterprises are civic or non-profit
organisations providing a social service to the
community free of charge, while the other half
said social enterprises are organisations using
business strategies to achieve a social aim.
Community and social enterprises have the
potential to play a vital role in sustainable
development, especially in the context of
an economic downturn and complex social
challenges. The social enterprises that
contributed to the research talked about some
of the issues that hinder their development such
as a lack of skilled staff, high operating costs, and
limited access to funding, business services and
facilities. So how can we support their continued
development at the local level?
Shopping at market
of the social enterprise landscape in their

communities. The study identified the priorities,
strengths, needs and challenges of the enterprises
operating in these areas and provided a baseline
from which to explore new local social enterprise
initiatives. It is a useful model for future studies
of other parts of Auckland.
The stocktake revealed that most of the social
enterprises are small organisations with, at
most, five staff. Their primary sources of income
are still the mainstream philanthropic funding
sources such as donations and grants. However,
funding sourced from trading goods and services
is slowly becoming more common. The mapping
exercise also identified two important elements.
One is the influence of the socio-economic
situation of the area: Waitemat tends to
Community and social

enterprises have the potential
to play a vital role in sustainable
development, especially in the
context of an economic downturn
and complex social challenges.
There is an opportunity to create an innovative
and enabling environment for social enterprises
in Auckland by developing strategic policies.
This could include a procurement policy that
focuses on social impact, value creation and fiscal
prudence. Social procurement is a key pillar in
the growth of social enterprises. It puts a value
on the benefits that social enterprises provide,
so increasing their viability and competitiveness.
Local Boards can play an important role in
developing the sector by contracting small, local
social enterprises to provide necessary products
and services such as catering, hospitality and
waste management.
37
The adoption of social return on investment

(SROI)28 as a method of project evaluation
would also support social enterprises, because it
accounts for environmental and social value not
currently measured through traditional financial
accounting. SROI captures the impact of projects
and programmes and helps decision makers to
understand the social value of an organisations
investments and initiatives.
Local government can support a culture
of innovation in the community sector by
incorporating a social enterprise component
into traditional community programmes. Such
projects could include a sustainability framework
that allows initiatives to thrive beyond the
project life span by trading or selling products
and services that the community needs. For
example, a proposed community garden
programme could have an economic component
where the produce grown is sold at local markets.
Seed funding or micro-loans for the scoping,
exploratory and start-up stages of social
enterprises are two of the financial mechanisms
that could support further growth in the
sector. Taking a blended approach to financing
innovation has been used by successful social
enterprises around the world.
28 www.thesroinetwork.org
38
This includes commercial (service level

agreements, government contracts, sales, and
commercial contracts) and non-commercial
(donations, grants and project income) activities.
While there is a need to develop social
enterprises, we must also support social
entrepreneurs. These change-makers and
visionaries provide innovative solutions to the
most pressing social problems. With partners
such as schools and incubators, local government
could develop low-cost practical interventions
that support social entrepreneurs, such as
capacity-building initiatives to enhance their
skills or the creation of a social entrepreneurs
network.
Understanding the emerging practice of social
enterprise can be difficult. One challenge for
us in NewZealand is how much international
terminology we should use and knowing when
to develop a more local discourse based on our
own context and practices. While no universally
accepted definition of social enterprise exists,
there are key characteristics that perhaps give
us a good enough definition that is neither too
rigid nor too loose. Social enterprises should have
one or more explicit social aims. They should use
trade in goods and services to generate revenue
and should use the profits they generate for
ongoing community benefit. These are all goals
I think we need to encourage.
Ngti Whtua rkeis proactive

approach to whnau development
Eru Lyndon
Policy and Development Manager, Ngti Whtua rkei Whai Maia Ltd.
Introduction
Ngti Whtua rkei are mana whenua in
Auckland with a membership of approximately
5,000 people. Its story like those of other
hapu and iwi has been marked by actions
of good faith not returned in kind resulting in
deprivation, land loss and death. Fortunately,
more recently Ngti Whtua rkeis story has
been characterised by development through
protest, collective action, the restoration of tribal
lands and assets, cultural and social development,
and acts of collaboration and manaakitanga
towards others.29
In late 2010, the government promoted Whnau
Ora its flagship policy for Mori. Ngti Whtua
o rkei Mori Trust Board (the trust board)
saw this policy as fitting well with its strategic
direction and core values, and as a catalyst to
developing service capability and capacity to
respond to the needs and aspirations of whnau.
Te Puni Kkiri (TPK) was the government agency
tasked with rolling out Whnau Ora and, despite
the rigorous process used to select Whnau Ora
providers, the trust board was successful in its bid.
"Mai Whnau makes it easy for

whnau to navigate what has
become a very complicated
health and social delivery sector."
The initial intent of the Whnau Ora policy

was to develop the organisational capacity
and capability of Whnau Ora providers. High
performing and responsive providers are seen as
a means to improving the wellbeing of whnau.
The first phase of the roll-out was to develop
a long-term strategy and business case that
would provide a basis for TPK to fund the trust
boards Whnau Ora activities. The trust board
successfully completed these documents, but
while they were being developed it became
apparent that whnau wanted to see and feel
something tangible. Mai Whnau was the trust
boards response to this desire.
Mai Whnau
Mai Whnau can be viewed through both
a service lens and a community and
Mori development lens. Through a service
lens, Mai Whnau engages whnau (families
and/or individuals) in an active planning
process where Kaitoko Whnau (Whnau
Development Facilitators) use Mori cultural
capital to facilitate the development of
Mai Whnau plans. Kaitoko Whnau then work
with whnau and other service providers to
achieve their aspirations. Mai Whnau plans
are tailored and based on a hierarchy of goal,
objective, action and task, which are oriented
towards the key development areas of health and
wellbeing, knowledge and skills, employment and
29 Manaakitanga describes a cultural concept based on the reciprocity of kindness, respect and humanity. See www.korero.maori.nz/news/mlw/theme.html
39
wealth creation, housing, and cultural identity.

Each stage of this hierarchy is time bound, which
encourages performance by whnau and Kaitoko
Whnau. Mai Whnau plans also contain review
dates that are agreed upon with whnau. The
feedback on progress provided in reviews enhances
performance, engagement and motivation.
Mai Whnau provides an integration point for a
range of services, including health services and
the innovative Industry Employment Pipeline
(IEP), an employment brokering programme that
has placed many young Mori in construction
jobs and apprenticeships. Mai Whnau
complements other services because it functions
as a referral point supported by Kaitoko Whnau,
who help to ensure that whnau understand the
value and requirements of services/programmes
40
that are integrated with Mai Whnau. From a

customer perspective, Mai Whnau makes it easy
for whnau to navigate what has become a very
complicated health and social delivery sector.
From a community and Mori development
perspective, Mai Whnau represents Ngti
Whtua rkeis response to the challenges
caused by rapid land loss and the colonisation
process, particularly as it relates to the traditional
welfare provision functions of tribes, and
the Ngti Whatua rkei tikanga (custom)
of manaakitanga towards all those who live
within their tribal rohe (territory). This point
was particularly poignant and compelling to
those that reviewed the collectives proposal to
become a Whnau Ora provider.
Kite flying, Matariki Festival

Photo by Stefan Marks
The next phase of Mai Whnau
Mai Whnau is a Ngti Whtua rkei-led initiative that

is helping Auckland families address their challenges and
achieve their aspirations
Mai Whnau was launched recently by the

Minister of Whnau Ora, Hon. Tariana Turia,
and early signs of Mai Whnaus effectiveness
are emerging. Since late May 2012, close to
200 whnau have enrolled and more than
100 Mai Whnau plans have been developed.
Also, more than 20 people have been placed
in jobs through the Mai Whnau-affiliated IEP
programme. This number is in addition to the 10
direct staff who develop and deliver Mai Whnau.
The next phase of Mai Whnau is focused
on expanding its reach by integrating further
services and programmes, enhancing and
developing relationships with like-minded
partners, and continuing to work with whnau to
support them to achieve their development goals
and aspirations.
41
Philanthropy: the venture capital

for social innovation
Jennifer Gill
CEO, ASB Community Trust
The origins of ASB Community Trust (the trust)

stretch back to Scotland where the idea of
trustee savings banks originated in 1810 as a
more dignified alternative to poor relief.30 The
Auckland Savings Bank opened in 1847 under
the leadership of SirJohn Logan Campbell and
has been providing financial support through
grants since its inception. The foundation
stone for the current trust was laid on 30May
1988, and since then the trust has distributed
more than $750 million to the communities of
Auckland and Northland.
Innovation doesnt always mean

starting up something brand new.
Instead, it may mean looking at
what currently exists, taking it
apart and putting it back together
in new and different ways.
Over time, however, we at the trust have
questioned our own effectiveness and the impact
on the groups that we fund. We have come to
realise that funding alone is not sufficient and we
must develop our own knowledge of what works.
We believe that we need to draw on the wisdom
of others and be prepared to say no, to take
risks, to evaluate what we do and to accept that
we wont always be right.
30 www.asbcommunitytrust.org.nz
42
With the launch of our new five-year strategic

plan, the trust is moving towards being a
more thoughtful and targeted grant maker.
What this means is that we are committed to
ensuring that, while continuing our traditional
community support funding, our focus will
increasingly be on working in partnership with
grantees and other funders to achieve projects
of greater scale and impact for the communities
of Auckland and Northland.
The trust will continue to identify issues facing
our region and fund organisations in a sustained
way over a number of years to try and address
these issues. The intention is to create significant
positive change by supporting innovative projects
and practices. This targeted approach will include
providing additional wrap-around support to
increase an organisations capacity to deliver.
The trust has been on a journey to try and
increase the impact of our funding, moving
from a model of charity hand out to one of
investment or hand up. We understand that
philanthropy has a role to play in supporting
social innovation because others often find it
risky or difficult to fund. Yet philanthropy is just
one partner; to be successful, we need to think
and behave collaboratively with a range of actors.
Southside Cult Couture 2012, supreme winner, Adrienne Whitewood
43
Also, innovation doesnt always mean starting

something brand new. Instead, it may mean
looking at what currently exists, taking it
apart and putting it back together in new and
different ways. This could mean that existing
partners come together in innovative ways to
make a difference.
We have looked at home and abroad to try and
understand how we can seed social innovation.
What we have learnt is that the answers to
complex social issues often rest with the
communities where these issues arise. It is this
thinking that led the trust to seek the wisdom
of communities to try and find innovative ways
to lift educational achievement for young Mori
and Pacific people. This was the genesis of a
significant fund established by the trust and the
Mori and Pacific Education Initiative.
The development of this programme was guided
by expert Mori and Pacific reference groups,
involving people from grassroots youth workers to
academics. These reference groups embarked on
a year-long process. Within culturally appropriate
frameworks, through thoughtful conversations,
debate and challenge, they reviewed available
research to identify how best to make a
difference. Eventually, communities were asked
to dream and expressions of interest were called
for. Thirty-seven short-listed groups were each
offered $3,000 to develop their proposal. Of
the ten groups that accepted this offer, seven
were approved for multi-year funding, including
support for capacity building and evaluation. A
further four projects were funded in 2011. More
than $15 million has been approved for these
innovative projects that are aiming to address the
educational underachievement of young Mori
and Pacific people.
Some of the projects funded under the Mori and

Pacific Initiative include the Computer Clubhouse
Trust, now called the High Tech Youth Network,
Mori Into Tertiary Education (MITE), Sylvia Park
School and C-me Mentoring Trust.
The High Tech Youth Network31 launched
a High Tech Youth Studio in Otara called
Studio274. Aimed at young people aged 16 to
24 from decile1 to decile3 schools, Studio274
helps students develop skills in creative
technologies such as digital production and film
making, animation, 3D gaming, visual design
and robotics. Participants with above-average
capabilities and emergent high-tech skills are
identified by their schools or a community
organisation.
The MITE Student Pipeline Project helps guide
Mori students through their education and
into meaningful cadetships, apprenticeships
and internships while they are still studying.32
Managed by Te Wnanga o Aotearoa, the
project is a joint initiative by tertiary providers
to help address Mori participation and
underachievement in tertiary education in
Auckland. It provides tangible job outcomes
for Mori students by building on existing
relationships between tertiary education and
corporate organisations. The key objective is
to provide a seamless pathway from tertiary
institutions through internships or cadetships
into employment.
Mt Wellingtons Sylvia Park Primary School is
being funded to set up a project co-ordinator
position to act as a key link between home
and school.33 This will help families understand
how well their children are doing at school,
and challenge the school to consider its
effectiveness in delivering programmes for
Mori and Pacific students.
31 www.hightechyouth.org
32 http://mite.org.nz/pipeline
33 www.asbcommunitytrust.org.nz/education-initiative/stage-one-funding/sylvia-park-school
44
Young people are early adopters of technology and The High Tech Youth Network enables them to explore, collaborate and
engage meaningfully in the learning opportunities of the twenty-first century
Under the branding Trades@school, C-me

Mentoring Trust promotes industry and trades
to students at schools.34 It takes industry into
the classroom and gives interested students an
understanding of the purpose of school subjects
and an awareness of the possibilities of life after
secondary school.
We believe these organisations are the true

pioneers of social innovation in Auckland. The
next challenge is to share and learn from these
innovators and support the replication and scaleup of successful high-impact projects and to
widen the benefit from a few people to many.
34 www.c-me.org.nz/index.php/home
45
46
Vodafone building, Viaduct Harbour
Corporate social responsibility

and social innovation
Xavier Black
Independent researcher
There is no doubt that more businesses are now

focused on doing good for their communities
and the environment, or at least talking about it.
The discourse on Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) has grown exponentially since the 1980s,
with dedicated books, conferences, academic
journals, associations and firms consulting
on best practice. As social need increases and
government spending on a number of key
issues (such as health, education, transport
and communication) decreases,35 greater
focus has been placed on the fundamental
role that business plays, or ought to play, in
society.36 There has been a shift in who is
taking responsibility for addressing social and
environmental problems.
Business has taken up the mantle of doing
good, with a dizzying array of terms and
concepts that inter-link traditional business
practices with being social or community
focused. Terms and concepts such as corporate
community investment, corporate community
involvement, corporate community engagement,
corporate citizenship, corporate accountability,
sustainability and socially responsible investing
all fall under the banner of CSR.37
While CSR has had roots internationally since
the 1960s, it has only taken hold in NewZealand
since the 1990s. Practice here started with
a copy and paste approach, where large
NewZealand businesses copied the CSR activities

of their multinational corporate headquarters.
In these cases, it was often: Well, HQ does it,
so so should we. This often resulted in CSR
being limited to (and understood to mean)
philanthropic donations to not-for-profit
organisations or, more recently, the greening of
business practices.
Businesses that are going out of their way to
do some form of good are on the increase.
NewZealand examples include the BNZ closing
its doors for a day for their staff to volunteer,
AMP providing scholarships so that Kiwis can
pursue their dreams and Vodafone funding the
salaries and expenses of people working in youth
charity. Further, to communicate these efforts,
there has been a massive spread of reporting and
certification (most notably for environmental
initiatives).
While there has been progress, CSR still tends
to be limited to this focus. Siloed into separate
budgets and portfolios (or occasionally a
corporate trust), this form of CSR tends to
involve charity giving (such as money or
providing goods and services), donor matching,
payroll giving, staff volunteering or the greening
of the supply chain. Often societal considerations
stand apart from core business and at the
periphery of what business does.
35 L Lawson. 2007. Geographies of Care and Responsibility. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 97 (1), 111.
36 S O Idowu and I Papasolomou. 2007. Are the corporate social responsibility matters based on good intentions or false pretences? An empirical study of the
motivations behind the issuing of CSR reports by UK companies. Corporate Governance 7(2), 13647.
37 E Nwankwo, N Phillips and P Tracey. 2007. Social investment through community enterprise: The case of multinational corporations involvement in the
development of Nigerian water resources. Journal of Business Ethics 73(1), 91102; M M Seitanidi and A Ryan. 2007. A critical review of forms of corporate
community involvement: from philanthropy to partnerships. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 12(3), 24767; and D Wilson,
P McKinlay, A von Tunzelmann, and L Chile. 2006. Business Social Investment Activity in New Zealand. Auckland: AUT University.
47
The question remains: Should this be called

social innovation? While some have decreed
that adding social considerations to a corporate
agenda is innovative in and of itself, others
consider this form of CSR to have limited
capacity to contribute to creating or developing
true social innovation.
Some consider CSR to be hopelessly inadequate
at addressing social needs.38 Practitioners Liam
and Adrian Simpson claim that Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR) is dead. Giving
money to charity, staff volunteering, painting
the community centre all good things but
peripheral to the business. They dont lead to
the creation of lasting social or environmental
impact.39 CSR is often perceived as business
offsetting negative social and environmental
impact, so cynicism towards CSR activities is rife.
Even worse, the more business has begun to
embrace corporate responsibility, the more it has
been blamed for societys failures. The legitimacy
of business has fallen to levels not seen in recent
history.40 In saying this, what CSR has done
for social innovation is to bring social issues to
the attention of business leaders and legitimise
business collaborations with government and the
not-for-profit sector. Social innovation occurs
through cross pollination between sectors41 and,
while it may not occur under the CSR banner,
CSR signified a shift where business got more
involved in cross-sector initiatives.
How do we systemically shift

the role that business plays and
place social issues at the core of
the business agenda so that we
can start to collaborate for social
innovation?
As CSR has evolved, a number of ideas have

popped up that may be better at producing
social innovation than CSR. Porter and Kramer
discuss shared value, which they define as
policies and operating practices that enhance
the competitiveness of a company while
simultaneously advancing the economic and
social conditions in the communities in which it
operates.42 Rather than segregating social and
environmental impact into a separate CSR team
and portfolio, shared value requires a review
of the core purpose and DNA of the business.
This is a shift from asking given what we do as
business as usual, what should we do in terms of
the community and environment? to in light
38 E Dermot. 2011. CSR is dead, long live social enterprise. The Guardian. socialenterprise.guardian.co.uk/social-enterprise-network/2011/aug/09/sharedvalue-csr-social-enterprise
39 W
avelength. 2010. The Business of Social Innovation: How to create new markets, new products, make money and make a difference.
www.thesamewavelength.com/pg/social-innovation.php
40 Porter and Kramer. 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review. www.hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-value
41 J Phills, K Deiglmeier and D Miller. 2008. Rediscovering Social Innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall, 3443.
42 Porter and Kramer. 2011. Creating Shared Value.
48
Variety the Children's Charity all-access playground at Long Bay
of our community and environment, what should

business as usual be? This idea is similar to the
notion of social enterprise, which explores blurred
business and not-for-profit organisational models.
In the global landscape, this idea is moving
forward in leaps and bounds. Richard Bransons
new project, The B Team, brings together
business leaders to champion concrete
solutions to help make capitalism a driving
force for social, environmental and economic
benefit.43 There are numerous examples of this
globally, particularly in developing countries
that are touted as largely untapped markets.44
Danone and the Grameen Bank have developed
a low-cost yogurt for children in Bangladesh
that provides 30 percent of childrens daily
recommended nutrients. Safaricom, a mobile
network in Kenya (part owned by Vodafone),
offers Vodacom M-PESA, a mobile-phone based

money transfer and micro-financing service.
M-PESA lets users store and transfer money on
their phones a big plus for many who do not
have access to bank accounts.
While we are seeing progress, most businesses
seem stuck in the limited CSR mentality. The
question remains: How do we systemically shift
the role that business plays and place social
issues at the core of the business agenda so that
we can start to collaborate for social innovation?
In NewZealand, we are exploring the answers
to this question. Where to from here? Its about
education, awareness, advocacy, networking,
research, and identifying the leaders and best
practice so that businesses are enabled to
innovate to create social value.
43 Idealog. 2012. Handley, Branson head up new international initiative The B Team. www.idealog.co.nz/blog/2012/10/handley-branson-head-new-internationalinitiative-b-team
44 C K Prahalad. 2006. The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.
49
50
Te Ao Whanua, Whare Thompson, Henderson
Reflections of a serial social

entrepreneur
Travis OKeefe
Social Entrepreneur
Born into poverty at Cannons Creek, Wellington,

I grew up with the Ngti Konohi hapu in
Whangara, a settlement made famous by the
movie Whale Rider. I experienced considerable
hardship during my childhood: living in an
overcrowded house in a benefit-dependent
whnau, having to grow our own food as a
result of poverty and surrounded by a multitude
of social ills. These experiences allowed me to
empathise with the difficulties that Mori face,
taught me the importance of being self sufficient
through hard work, and are the reason I am so
motivated to help others.
True to my entrepreneurial
nature and bringing my
indigenous Mori viewpoints
and qualities into business, all
my projects have three things in
common doing good, making
money and having fun.
I had my first business at age 21, managing a
swimming pool. Since then I have built multiple
businesses with varying degrees of success and,
in doing so, learned lessons from my successes
and my failures.
I founded Health TV, a company that won
national awards for health innovation and
positive societal impact. Health TV developed
new technology and built a nationwide Internet
Protocol Television (IPTV) channel for waiting

rooms in doctors surgeries and hospitals. We
use the internet to send educational content
to television screens for people focused on
health and wellbeing at the point of care. The
waiting room is a critical moment of truth if
you want to change the health and wellbeing of
families. We proved that it is possible to affect
consumers health decisions by educating the
right person with the right message at the right
time. As founder of IMTV Ltd, an early-stage
business investment company, I have gained an
understanding of education, the international
distribution of technology, and how to
communicate with different ethnic groups.
True to my entrepreneurial nature and bringing
my indigenous Mori viewpoints and qualities
into business, all my projects have three things
in common doing good, making money
and having fun. I am resolute in my need to
incorporate my social vision into my businesses,
which is why they all have a social side to them.
One of my current projects is a business that
helps elderly people remember to take their
medicine. I discovered that this was a global
problem and that solving it has the potential
to save hospitals millions of dollars. I looked at
all the available solutions and then developed
an idea that combines different technologies
and existing products. This service consists of a
pillbox with wireless sensors that shows whether
or not a patient has taken their medication.
51
The pill box has a mobile phone chip in it that

talks to a cloud-based server from which alerts
and reminders can be sent to the patient, their
family, their pharmacist and their doctor. Also, a
pharmacist educates the patient and ensures that
the right medications are loaded, and a software
tool measures the patients health improvement
for the funder. This combination has been proven
to work in the United Kingdom. The next stage is
to prove that it works in NewZealand.
To solve the root of a social ill requires
sustainable revenue first and foremost, so you
need to find the right business model. Until
you can solve that, you will only be placing a
sticking plaster on a festering wound and when
you go the problem will remain. The current
environment has changed, government service
provider contracts are consolidating, donors
and sponsorship are reducing, and the global
recession has created a new status quo. This
means charities and not-for-profits must adapt
to survive.
I have listened to many people who say that the
government should keep funding their charitable
project. My advice is dont hold your breath:
either you take control of your destiny and find
a new solution to fund your project or react
when change happens to you.
I see most of the not-for-profit sector starting

to put in place the first option a social
enterprise, but they really do not understand
what it takes to succeed or the risks involved.
The facts are that:
nine out of 10 start-ups fail (its high risk)
on average, it will take approximately 2-5
years of burning capital before profits can
be generated
a start-up is not like an established business;
it has its own unique stages of development,
with distinctive behaviour and modes of
thinking
a start-up is a temporary organisation that
only exists to find a scalable and repeatable
business model
people experienced with start-ups are the
key to success.45
So, I recommend option two acquisitions
for good. Its less risky and easier to manage,
it generates profits faster and it doesnt distract
staff from their core roles. Its also easier to access
bank funding to finance the acquisition cost and
you dont have the problem of the government
changing its policies every three years.
At a basic level, you need an economic engine

some sort of service that people are willing
to pay for and through which you can generate
profits. Two new options are:
Examples of acquisitions for good in

NewZealand include Sanitarium (owned by
the Seventh Day Adventist Church), St John
Ambulance and their medical alarm business,
and iwi with commercial subsidiaries that make
money for their social divisions.
1. starting a social enterprise a business that

has twin bottom lines of making money
and doing good
There are fewer risks involved in acquisitions for

good than in start-ups, and these risks can be
reduced further through the following practices:
2. acquisitions for good buying an existing

business with a long history of profit
generation and with much opportunity to
grow, and then changing the businesss
constitution so that the dividends are used
to fund the core services of the charity/notfor-profit.
educate and gain board buy-in before

beginning the search for a business, because
good businesses get purchased quickly
buy a business with growth opportunities that
can be realised quickly, so speeding up the
repayment of the cost of acquisition
45 See www.slideshare.net/search/slideshow?searchfrom=header&q=nztiok for more information.
52
Avondale fleamarket
look for synergies between the existing

organisation and the new business; for
example, if both have general administration
or marketing staff, you only need one team
for both
understand that business brokers work for
the seller (and get paid upon selling),
not for the buyer
buy 50 percent of the business initially then

buy out the rest over time, so reducing the risk
of losing the key person who has significant
intellectual property
set the business up as a subsidiary with an
independent board of members with the
skills and experience to lead the next phase in
developing the business.46
employ experts to navigate this process
46 See www.slideshare.net/tiokacquisitions-for-good-presentation-for-asb-ct for more information.
53
54
HazMobile event providing a free service for householders to safely dispose of hazardous waste
The business of turning

problems into solutions
Billy Matheson
Principal Advisor Social Entrepreneurship, Auckland Council
The contributors to this first Social Innovation

in Auckland report represent just a few of the
many individuals, organisations and sectors
across Auckland working to solve some of our
toughest social, environmental and creative
problems. Their stories tell of the potential for
achieving transformational change and some of
the challenges involved in doing things in a new
way. Their stories also highlight the importance
of collaboration, partnerships and the networks
of supporters and champions that make these
projects possible.
While working together is vital to develop any
innovation, it is also important to acknowledge
the role that individual leadership plays in
creating positive change. Each contributor to this
report can be described as a social entrepreneur.
They are the people who co-ordinate, connect,
challenge and, perhaps most importantly, can
embody the particular cause or project they are
working on. By combining the tools of business
with strategies that build community, they bring
people and resources together around some
of our toughest problems and, in the process,
transform them into solutions.
Bill Drayton is credited with coining the term
social entrepreneur back in 1972. He went
on to found the Ashoka Foundation,47 the first
global network for social entrepreneurs, and
he continues to be one of the most influential

thinkers on social innovation. According to
Drayton, business became entrepreneurial around
300years ago. The result was the Industrial
Revolution, an outpouring of innovation and
wealth creation like the world had never seen
before. In contrast, Drayton believes that the
social sector got left behind, forced to rely on a
combination of government funding and charity.
Then, about 30years ago, innovation in the
social sector started to increase as it began to
use the same entrepreneurial and competitive
architecture as business.48
If we want systemic solutions

to the major challenges we face
as a society, then we need to
create markets for the kinds of
change that we want to see in
the world.
Draytons view of social entrepreneurship is
provocative and I believe useful. It brings our
attention to the historical separation of our
social, environmental and creative problems
from the engine of our economy, namely private
enterprise. The consequence of this separation
is that many of the most important issues we
face supporting young parents, welcoming
47 www.ashoka.org
48 See www.youtube.com for the Ashoka Foundation "The Citizen Sector Transformed" video featuring Bill Drayton.
55
new migrants, solving child poverty and taking

action on climate change are widely considered
to be problems for charities and not-for-profit
organisations rather than as opportunities for
innovation and entrepreneurship.49
Thanks to advances in information technology
and analysis, we now have (perhaps for the
first time) an accurate idea of what many of
these tough problems cost our country in dollar
terms. For example, the total economic impact
of alcohol abuse in New Zealand has been
estimated at $5.3 billion a year, or $14.5 million a
day. To put that into perspective, thats 4 per cent
of GDP.50 If you were an entrepreneur and could
see a way to significantly transform the problem
of alcohol abuse (and so reduce that spend), how
would you get paid? Without that return, how
could you attract investment to develop your
idea, do the research and development, employ
the staff, train the trainers and do everything else
necessary to do a great job?
There is a growing consensus among writers
and thinkers on social innovation that if we
want to achieve systemic solutions to the major
challenges we face as a society, we need to
create markets for the kinds of change that we
want to see in the world.51 This thinking is about
much more than just an increase in government
funding for innovation (although that might
be a useful first step). It is about developing an
economy that actually rewards positive social,
environmental and creative outcomes.52
Social impact bonds are one example of these
emerging social capital markets. They allow
social entrepreneurs to raise venture capital to
solve tough social problems. Like most social
innovations, they require a partnership between
the private sector (usually a bank that creates the
bond and takes it to market), the public sector
(that commits to paying a certain amount at

a future date if the result is achieved), and the
community sector (organisations and networks
that have the relationships to deliver the change).
Like all financial investments, social impact bonds
involve risk; that is why they pay a return to
those who invest in them.
Social procurement is another approach with
considerable potential. This involves businesses,
central government and local councils, including
social, environmental and creative outcomes
in their commissioning of goods and services.
Social procurement policies exist in the United
Kingdom, Canada, the United States and
Australia. These policies can be as simple as
preferential consideration for bidders that
commit to employing at-risk young people,
businesses that have invested in low-emission
vehicle fleets or performance incentives for
innovative programmes that can provide
significant savings in the long term.53
Auckland Council is supporting the emerging
social innovation sector. It is the first local
government body in NewZealand to create a
permanent position dedicated to understanding,
working with, and looking for opportunities to
grow the practice of social entrepreneurship.
This first Social Innovation in Auckland report
is one initiative designed to build momentum
in this space. Auckland Council is involved in
hosting workshops, supporting conferences and
catalysing networks to build capacity and foster
innovation in the sector. There are exciting
opportunities to explore social procurement,
partnership on projects, seed funding and social
lending for those social entrepreneurs that can
help Auckland Council deliver the objectives in
the Auckland Plan.
49 F Westley, B Zimmerman and M Quinn Patton. 2007. Getting to Maybe: How the World is Changed. Toronto: Random House.
50 See www.police.govt.nz/news/release/26398.html
51 N Francis, M Cuskelly. 2008. The End of Charity: Time for Social Enterprise. London: Allen and Unwin.
52 See The New Economics Foundation video The Prevention Papers at www.youtube.com
53 See www.socialtraders.com.au/social-procurement
56
The Kitchen is a co-working space for changemakers in Auckland
Social innovation, particularly as it is unfolding

in the NewZealand context, is complex. Geoff
Mulgan, a global thinker and champion for social
innovation from the United Kingdom, claims that
social innovation:54
1. comprises a new combination or hybrid
of existing elements, rather than anything
wholly new
2. cuts across organisational or disciplinary
boundaries
3. creates compelling new relationships between
previously separate individuals and groups.
Social entrepreneurs, hybrid organisations and
blended-value propositions challenge our ideas
about how the world works. Are you a business
or a charity? Are your staff community workers
or business people? Is your purpose doing good

or making money? This ambiguity can make it
difficult to understand and support the work of
social entrepreneurs, but it is this space between
genres that gives social entrepreneurs the
conceptual room to find new solutions. In other
words, its easier to think outside the box if
youre already standing outside the box.
If we want lasting solutions to our toughest
social, environmental and creative problems,
rather than just the short-term management
of them, NewZealand needs to innovate.
This is what social entrepreneurs do best.
Auckland Council is committed to being a
constructive partner in growing the business of
turning problems into solutions.
54 G
Mulgan, S Tucker, R Ali, and B Sanders. 2007. Social innovation: what it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated. Oxford: Skoll Centre for Social
Entrepreneurship, Said Business School.
57
Upcoming conferences
SOCANZ 2013 Innovation

Auckland Conference
Social Innovation and

Entrepreneurship Conference
Aotea Centre, 25-27 March 2013
Massey University, 27-29 November 2013
The SOCANZ 2013 conference will bring

together a group of leading local and
international practitioners for two days of
keynotes, workshops, dialogue and networking.
The NewZealand Social Innovation

and Entrepreneurship Research Centre
(sierc.massey.ac.nz) is pleased to announce
its 2013 conference will be held at Massey
Universitys Innovation Campus, Albany,
Auckland, from 27 to 29 November.
The conference will present a mix of talks from

energetic experts on social entrepreneurship
and workshops where you can either harvest
ideas from a cross-section of subjects or elect
to explore one theme in great depth.
An important part of the conference is the
master class on day three of the event where
you can take the time to learn from your peers
and mentors around specific issues facing social
entrepreneurs.
You will:
meet with more than 300 like-minded people
hear from experienced practitioners about the
impact of innovation
contribute to shared knowledge through
participatory workshops
learn about social entrepreneurship.
You can also:
be part of a master class environment that
encourages and nurtures social enterprises
across the city to improve the economic
and social outcomes for Auckland and the
wider country.
Please contact Shaun Lines at shaun@grow.co.nz
for more information or refer to
www.grow.co.nz/events/socanz-2013-about
58
The conference theme Blurring Boundaries,

Transcending Barriers captures the fluidity
and flexibility essential for collaborative action
and novel thinking in this emerging scholarly
field. Following on from the successful
inaugural 2011 conference, the 2013
conference will bring together participants
across sectors (non-profit, business and
government) and academic disciplines to
explore new ways to advance the theory
and practice of social innovation and social
entrepreneurship.
In addition to keynote and paper presentations,
the conference will feature special sessions on a
variety of topics. An interactive session organised
by Auckland Council will discuss youth social
innovation.
SIERC invites theoretical and empirically
informed papers that explore and contribute
to the understanding of social innovation and
entrepreneurship. Proposals for special sessions
on a specific topic are also invited. These sessions
can be academic, and/or practice and policy
focused. We encourage special sessions that will
provoke debate and dialogue (for example, world
caf type discussions). Papers and special sessions
around the conference theme are particularly
welcome. Please contact Professor Anne de Bruin
at a.m.debruin@massey.ac.nz or refer to
sierc.massey.ac.nz for updates.
Clarks Lane footbridge opening, Hobsonville
59
RIMU-1076-02/13_AC1527
ISBN 978-1-927216-99-6 (Print)

ISBN 978-1-927216-98-9 (Online)

Social Innovation

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Social Innovation

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Social

Social Innovation in Auckland

Cover image: Clarks Lane footbridge opening, Hobsonville

Social Innovation in Auckland

Southside Arts Festival

Social Innovation in Auckland

Social Innovation in Auckland

Outdoor exercise equipment, Murphy Park playground, thuhu

Social Innovation in Auckland

In recent years social innovation has attracted

Although often presented as a

and organic food), academia (pedagogical models

1 Centre for Social Innovation. 2012. socialinnovation.ca/about/social-innovation

Social Innovation in Auckland

social innovators to connect with others and have

During the industrialisation and urbanisation

Social Innovation in Auckland

Walking school bus, Manukau

OECD 2010 Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation.

OECD. 2010. Social Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation, p191

Mulgan et al. 2007. Social innovation.

10 Hostick-Boakye & Hothi. 2011. Grow your Own, p4

Social Innovation in Auckland

The social innovation

The nature of innovation is changing dramatically

Social innovation is no longer

The Kitchen is a co-working space for changemakers in Auckland

Social Innovation in Auckland

Mainstream businesses too are increasingly

The social innovation continuum

Their innovative activity may be accommodated

Social innovation for youth

16 FORA. 2009. New Nature of Innovation. Report to the OECD. Copenhagen.

Social Innovation in Auckland

Failure to address the youth employment

being spear-headed by COMET Auckland, which

Social Innovation in Auckland

Auckland Unleashed Summit

The essence of hybrid innovation is its

Simultaneous social and economic value creation

Social Innovation in Auckland

Its education Jim, but not as

There are moments in life when our balance is

technology in their school. Expecting to see the

Social Innovation in Auckland

The children had to learn, on

Russell Burt, principal for 17 years and teacher

Social Innovation in Auckland

Fast forward to school year 2012. We now have

Last year we formed the Manaiakalani

We have raised money to start a wireless

This approach has directly improved the

This year Tamki College, the only secondary

23 A small and inexpensive laptop, primarily for internet use.

Today, three years on from my first encounter,

Social Innovation in Auckland

From little things, big things grow

I came to NewZealand from China with my

The trust establishment meeting was held at the

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, many

Today, the trust offers culturally and linguistically

In 1998, together with a group of new migrant

Social Innovation in Auckland

Learning through experience, Long Bay Regional Park

1 Centre for Social Innovation. 2012. socialinnovation.ca/about/social-innovation

16 FORA. 2009. New Nature of Innovation. Report to the OECD. Copenhagen.