Rationale for government provision Does the need for Social and Cultural Cohesion justify government intervention? A private education market will lead to Schools that do not necessarily perpetuate important cultural values, e.g., tolerance, equality Provision of a differentiated product: schools distinguished by a cultural, racial or religious character
View full slide show




Entrepreneurship: is it good enough to be social? John F. McVea and Michael J. Naughton Introduction • The term Social Entrepreneurship has experienced a huge growth in influence over that last decade. The literature proposes a number of advantages to social entrepreneurship as a frame of reference: • Promoting innovation within non-profits • Leveraging and focusing scarce philanthropic resources • Faster response to strategic challenges • Infusion of business skills to non-business world • Involvement of non government assets in social problems • Creation of hybrid (blurred) organizations between for profit and non profit worlds. It is widely observed that practice has outpaced theoretical development leading to little agreement on definitions or frameworks for social entrepreneurship. We believe that widespread and unchallenged acceptance of the term Social Entrepreneurship masks some dangers and has contributed to confusion in the field. We believe that if we apply some insights from Catholic Social Teaching to the issue of social entrepreneurship we can move beyond the false dichotomy of Entrepreneurship/ Social Entrepreneurship and identify three specific entrepreneurial strategies which support a more robust discussion of the nature of the work that is entrepreneurship. We believe that the field would benefit from spending less time discussing social entrepreneurship and more time discussion the nature of the good entrepreneur. • • • • • The dangers of naïve acceptance of Social Entrepreneurship • • • The rhetorical risk: • Narrow definition: if S.E. is simply used to rebrand non-profits then much of the value of the new activities, hybrid design, stimulation of new resources and innovation is lost. • Implied dichotomy: if “good” ventures are termed “social” it can imply that other forms of entrepreneurship are “asocial” or “anti social” • Boundarylessness: In contrast, if all business activities are deemed “social”, to some degree or other, then the term loses all meaning focus on the distinctive phenomenon that is S.E. Despite these risks we are more concerned with a risk beyond rhetoric; the risk of undermining the meaning of work, particularly from the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching. While this perspective is drawn from the Catholic tradition, accepting the content of CST does not require acceptance of Catholic faith (Guitan, 2009). The three goods of social entrepreneurship • We are concerned by the side-effects of a concentration thesis that suggests that the moral responsibilities of entrepreneurship can be concentrated in a subset of businesses called social enterprises, presumably leaving other enterprise to simply concentrate on serving themselves. • We are concerned by the impact such a concentration thesis could have on the conception of the meaning of work beyond the world of social enterprise. • We are concerned with how such an approach can focus attention solely on the altruistic contributions of entrepreneurial ventures as the sole measure of their contribution to the Common Good • Instead we propose that, rather than trying to determine the difference between entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship, it would be more productive to focus on the questions “What is Good Entrepreneurship? What action and activities define that goodness?” • We further propose that, by apply the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching, we can identify three specific strategies through which entrepreneurial ventures may contribute to the Common Good thus suggesting that good entrepreneurship requires a focus on: 1. Good Goods. The primary way an entrepreneurial venture can contribute to the Common Good is by bringing into existence new products and services which are inherently good and which enrich lives and minimize any unintended harms. This can include what we call the “entrepreneurship of the mundane”, that is, the manufacture of the nuts and bolts and basic necessities of life as well as the creation of life saving treatments. However, inclusion of good goods as a primary moral contribution of entrepreneurship must also require of the entrepreneur analysis of what goods are not good, and what aspects of even good goods should be redesigned or rethought in order to minimize unintended consequences. We find, in our discussions, that this is a much under appreciated dimension of the good of entrepreneurship. 2. Good Work. The second way an entrepreneurial venture can contribute to the Common Good is through the nature of the work that is carried out by the venture. This dimension has several aspects both internal and external to the entrepreneur: • The development of good character in the entrepreneur. This aspect of the good is derived from the subjective dimension of work, that is, just as how-we-work ends up changing the world, so working-on-the-world changes us. Most professionals spend the majority of their waking hours at work. As habits, character and wisdom are developed through experience and activity, for the entrepreneur, doing good work is an important opportunity to develop character. Society as a whole is better off for having good, successful entrepreneurial leaders who, through that calling, can become leaders of character. This dimension of the entrepreneurial good is widely unappreciated even by entrepreneurs themselves • Good relations with employees, customers and other stakeholders. Value creation and trade creates opportunities for the building of social relationships. The central question is “Are you in good relation with those with whom you create value?’ Do your employees have opportunity to develop as people? 3. Good Wealth. The third way the good entrepreneur can contribute to the Common Good is through the creation of good wealth. Good wealth requires a balance of reward for labor/ creativity with the provision of a living wage to all. Good wealth is often captured by individual action but has social strings attached. From the CST perspective the creation of good wealth implies a particular solidarity with the poor. One way to contribute to the common good is to donate altruistically to those in need. But even here, altruism is only one of a number of possible strategies. Good entrepreneurs may also contribute by donating their time or their particular skills. Indeed, since the donation of time and work often requires physical interaction with those in need, it often generates a solidarity of far greater integrity. Finally, it must be emphasized that altruism, for the entrepreneur, is always dependent, indeed subsequent to the creation of good wealth in the first place. Literature cited Alvord, Sarah, David L. Brown, and Christine W. Letts, 2004. “Social Entrepreneurship and Societal Transformation: An Exploratory Study,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 40:260. Benedict XVI, Caritas et veritate,   Boschee, Jerr. 1998 “What does it take to be a social entrepreneur?” National Centre for Social Entrepreneurs (www.socialentrepreneurs.org/whatdoes/html), 5pp.   Cannon, Carl. 2000. “Charity for profit: how the new social entrepreneurs are creating good by sharing wealth” National Journal, June 16: 1898-1904.   Christie, Michael and Benson Honig. 2006. “Social entrepreneurship: New research findings.” Journal of World Business. 41: 1-5.   Dees, Gregory, J., 1998. “The Meaning of ‘Social Entrepreneurship,’” Original Draft: 10/3.   Drucker, P.F. 1985. Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York: Harper & Row.   Fowler, Alan. “NGDOs as a moment in history: beyond aid to social entrepreneurship or civic innovation?” Third World Quarterly, 21(4): 637-654.   Gregg, S. and G. Preece: 1999, Christianity and Entrepreneurship (The Centre for Independent Studies Limited, St. Leonards, NSW, Australia).   Hibbert, Sally A., Gillian Hogg and Theresa Quinn. “Consumer response to social entrepreneurship: The case of the Big Issue in Scotland.” International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing. 7(3): 288-301.   Johnson, Sherrill, 2000. “Literature Review on Social Entrepreneurship,” Canadian Center for social Entrepreneurship. (http://www.bus.ualberta.ca/ccse/Publications/).   John Paul II, Pope.: 1992 Laborem Exercens (On Human Work): 1981, in D. J. O’Brien and T. A. Shannon, (eds.), Catholic Social Thought (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY).   John Paul II, Pope.: 1992 Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Social Concern): 1987 in D. J. O’Brien and T. A. Shannon, (eds.), Catholic Social Thought (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY).   Kennedy, R., G, Atkinson, and M. Naughton, (eds.): 1994, Dignity of Work: John Paul II Speaks To Managers and Workers (University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland).   Mair, Johanna and Ernesto Noboa, 2003. “Social Entrepreneurship: How Intentions to Create a Social Enterprise get Formed,” IESE Business School.   Mair, Johanna and Ignasi Marti, 2006. “Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight,” Journal of World Business. 41: 36-44.   Melé, D.:2001, ‘A Challenge for Business Enterprises: Introducing the Primacy of the Subjective Meaning of Work in Work Organization’, (http://www.stthomas.edu/cathstudies/cst/mgmt/le/papers/mele.htm) Conclusions We have argued that, while there is great promise in the contemporary social entrepreneurship movement, there are also a number of important dangers. We propose that, if we confront rather than acquiesce to these dangers, we can use the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching to broaden the scope of entrepreneurial ventures that we study, to enrich the moral dimension of entrepreneurial strategy and to deepen the teaching of entrepreneurship as a whole. We recommend the following to move toward these contributions: • Incorporate social entrepreneurship into entrepreneurship in a way that enhances the three goods of entrepreneurship. Specifically we propose replacing the questions “What is social entrepreneurship?” with the questions “What does it mean to be a Good entrepreneur?” From this perspective we can then apply what we have called the three goods of entrepreneurship as a means of supplying critical challenge and inspiration to all forms of entrepreneurship such that the true moral dimension of this critical force in our lives comes into fruition. • Encourage research within the entrepreneurship discipline that addresses traditional social entrepreneurial issues such as micro lending, fair trade products, etc. • Develop bridge courses such as Theo/Cath 306 which help students understand and experience the meaning of the good entrepreneur as well as connect students to the spiritual and moral principles of a good entrepreneur. • Expose entrepreneurship students to so-called social entrepreneurs as well so-called conventional good entrepreneurs so they can see the spectrum of entrepreneurial activities. © File copyright Colin Purrington. You may use for making your poster, of course, but please do not plagiarize, adapt, or put on your own site. Also, do not upload this file, even if modified, to third-party file-sharing sites such as doctoc.com. If you have insatiable need to post a template onto your own site, search the internet for a different template to steal. File downloaded from http://colinpurrington.com/tips/ academic/posterdesign. Acknowledgments I am indebted to Michael Naughton and Laura Dunham for their reflections and thoughts on this paper.
View full slide show




24 Functions are not Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods F are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods Methods are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are are not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not not Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions Functions
View full slide show




Other Measures of Cohesion • Sequential Cohesion •Procedures, in which one procedure provides input to the next, are kept together – and everything else is kept out – You should achieve sequential cohesion, only once you have already achieved the preceding types of cohesion. •Procedural Cohesion •Keep together several procedures that are used one after another – Even if one does not necessarily provide input to the next. Weaker than sequential. •Temporal Cohesion •Operations that are performed during the same phase of the execution of the program are kept together, and everything else is kept out – For example, placing together the code used during system start-up or initialization – Weaker than procedural cohesion. •Utility Cohesion Related utilities which cannot be logically placed in other cohesive units are kept together – A utility is a procedure or class that has wide applicability to many different subsystems and is designed to be reusable. – For example, the java.lang.Math class.  © Lethbridge/Laganière 2001 • Chapter 9: Architecting and designing software 24
View full slide show




Other measures of Cohesion • Sequential Cohesion •Procedures, in which one procedure provides input to the next, are kept together – and everything else is kept out • You should achieve sequential cohesion, only once you have already achieved the preceding types of cohesion. •Procedural Cohesion •Keep together several procedures that are used one after another • Even if one does not necessarily provide input to the next. Weaker than sequential. •Temporal Cohesion •Operations that are performed during the same phase of the execution of the program are kept together, and everything else is kept out • For example, placing together the code used during system start-up or initialization. • Weaker than procedural cohesion. •Utility Cohesion •When related utilities which cannot be logically placed in other cohesive units are kept together • A utility is a procedure or class that has wide applicability to many different subsystems and is designed to be reusable. • For example, the java.lang.Math class.  • © Lethbridge/Laganière 2001 Chapter 9: Architecting and designing software 24
View full slide show




Workday @ Yale – Organization Structure for Vision/Plan Phase Officers Steering Committee Shauna King (Executive Sponsor) Cynthia Smith (Provost office) Julie Grant (Business Operations) Len Peters (ITS) Nancy Creel-Gross (HR) Steve Murphy (Finance) John Mayes (Change Leadership) Advisor Groups Faculty Lifecycle Ernie Huff Cynthia Walker Cynthia Smith A-M Hummerstone Kathy Schoonmaker Donna Cable Joe Crosby Other Professional Schools TBD Deloitte Advisory Team Higher Education Lead: Kathy Karich Workday Lead: TBD Workday Advisor: David Hom HR Transformation: Walt Sokoll Finance Transformation: Walter Porter Strategy Advisor: Mark Price Sponsored Awards Advisor: David Stahler Kathie Schwerdtfeger Business Intelligence Advisor: Rishi Agarwal Program Leadership Business Program Lead Jacqueline Tucker Sponsored Awards Andrew Rudczynski Alice Tangredi-Hannon Joanne Bentley Cynthia Walker IT Program Lead Marc Ulan Program Management & Control Ryan Schlagheck Gregory Baker • Program Management Analyst Susan Pacini • Program Management Coordinator Grace Frith • PMO Analyst Sam Morgan • Workday Customer Success Manager Karla Davenport-Gratzol HCM / Payroll Workstream Finance Workstream Nancy Creel-Gross Fred Giacoma Lucy Lucker Nate Groves • HCM Lead 1 Judy Offutt • HCM Lead 2 Jodi McCullagh • HCM Core HR Lead Jaci-Beth Ward • HCM Compensation Lead Corey Rossman • Payroll Lead Beth Anderson • Faculty Life Cycle Lead TBC-Anna Maria Hummerstone • Faculty Life Cycle Analyst Hadar Call • Faculty Life Cycle Analyst Millie Anderson • HCM Solution Architect Johanna Ritch • Payroll Solution Architect Charles Williamson • HCM Consultant Brian Harvey • HCM / Payroll Subject Matter Advisors TBD • General Accounting Lead Andy Sgambato • Business Information Model Lead Liz Bilodeau • Procurement, AP & Expense Lead Rob Bores • Sponsored Awards Management Lead Tracy Walters • Gifts Lead Chris Watkins • Sponsored Awards Management Analyst Michele Greenhouse • Procurement, AP & Expense Analyst Rodney Brunson • Financial Accounting / Projects / BIM Solution Architect Shanna Arnold • Grants / AR / Procurement / Suppliers Solution Architect Kashaka Nedd • Financial Accounting / BIM / Grants Subject Matter Advisors TBD • Financials Analyst Ross Galloway • Sponsored Awards Management / Controls Solution Architect Jason Jacobs • Solution Architect Matt Luby Cheryl Chinen BI/DW & Reporting Workstream Functional Lead: Lourdes Reyes Technical Lead: M. Satterwhite/ K. Broderick/Andrew Dinin • Technical Architect Shane Anderson • Business Analyst (FIN) Karen Rosset • Business Analyst (HCM/Pay) Ron Lipkins • Technical Analyst 1 Poojitha Kuraganti • Technical Analyst 2 Francis Garcia • Technical Analyst 3 Faith Yen • BI/DW Functional Solution Architect Biju Yohannan • BI/DW Technical Solution Architect TBD • BI/DW Data Architect TBD • BI/DW Reporting Architect Ross Dodd Technology Workstream Security & Controls Workstream Change Management Workstream Darrell Cook Andrew Dinin Karen Rosset Richard Rudnicki TBD Andrea Lee • Technical Architect Shane Anderson • Integration Analyst (HCM/Pay) Brian Young • Integration Analyst (HCM/Pay) Robert Goclowski • Integration Analyst (FIN) David Griesbach Kevin Quigley • Integration Analyst Igor Budyansky • Testing Manager Jason Shuff • Testing Support TBD • Integrations & Conversion Analyst (YSM) Steve Fielding Bobbie Routhier • Conversion Manager Kirsten Daly • IT Project Manager TBD-Revisit Sept’13 • Integration Analyst – Andrew Blakeslee • Conversion Analyst – TBD • Testing Analyst – TBD • Integration Developer – Samir Joshi • IAM Analyst Josh Nabozny (Interim) • Security & Controls Analyst John DeNezzo • IAM / Workday Technical Subject Matter Advisors TBD • Security and Controls Subject Matter Advisors TBD Service Group Leadership Brent Dickman (Interim) • Change Management Generalist Janice Murphy-Wallace • Communications Specialist Mark Lackowski • Change Management Consultant Cara Burgess Black font = Requested Yale Resources Blue font = Deloitte Consulting Blue font = Deloitte Consulting Advisors Underlined = Third-party vendor Last updated: 9/17/13
View full slide show