8/9/2019 The Spore SE scene in year 2020

1/4

The Spore SE scene in year 2020

Whats this about?

This was a Feast Meetup organised by James Norris, and facilitated by Jared. As part of the co-

creation process, the event evolved from a meetup into an opportunity to use Future Thinking

methods to understand the different factors that might influence the future development of the

social enterprise / social entrepreneurship movement in Singapore for the next 10 years. We call

this 20/20 vision. =)

Futures Thinking?

The foremost progenitors of this tool is the Long Now Foundation, which has a 10,000 year

timeframe. Futurist Peter Schwartz lectures at the LKYSPP, and also consults with the Spore

government. The Lien Centre has organised a seminar on The Future of the Non-Profit Sector.

When, where, who?

9 of us gathered at Food For Thought 8Q SAM on 7 Jun. Among us were James, Erin Frey, Anoj,

Sourabh, Chris Jensen, Eddy (NUS), Adib Jalal, Bernard Leong, Jared.

What was the process like?

We first started by each listing out a series of possible factors that could influence the SE scenes

development. In no particular order, these were: government regulation, government funding,

technology, religion, strength of economy, regional coperation, societal acceptance, global

consciousness, schools curriculum changes (including MBAs), freedom of expression,

success/impact of Ses, climate change & other natural disasters.

We then each decided on the 2 strongest factors, and then took a democratic vote on the factors

which featued the most. People, Education, Mainstreaming, Disasters and Technology all got just

1 vote. Societal acceptance garnered 3 votes, and success of SEs and government influence tied

for 4 votes each.

It was surmised that societal acceptance was linked to success of SEs the more successfully

SEs in Singapore proved to be, the more socially acceptable they woud become as career

options, for individuals as well as friends and families.

8/9/2019 The Spore SE scene in year 2020

2/4

What were the results?

Taking government influence as the x-axis and success of SEs as the y-axis, it was possible to

construct a simple 4-quandrant scenario planning exercise:

A note about government influence we have not split this into subsidiary components such as

legislation, funding and governance. It was recognised that funding is not always good (can

become a crutch), while legislation is not necessararily bad (such as CLCs in the UK and L3Cs in

Oregon, US). So we have simply labelled it as being either a positive or negative influence.

We then worked through each of the scenarios, and encapsulated each scenario with a short

phrase:

SCENARIO A The Hub

In a future where there are not only high impact SEs but also positive government influence,

the following could reasonably occur:

o Significant social impact, both locally and regionally.

+ve govtinfluence

-ve govtinfluence

HighimpactSEs

Non-performingSEs

SCENARIO A

SCENARIO BSCENARIO C

SCENARIO D

8/9/2019 The Spore SE scene in year 2020

3/4

o Universities would have incorporated this into curriculum

o The word social is removed from social entrepreneurship, because SEs have become

mainstreamed.o Big businesses in Singapore start to realise that CSR is insufficient, and move towards more

SE-like behaviour.

o We start to see the creation of mega SEs, which can rival Asian MNCs for market space.

o One possible downside is that SE becomes such an attractive space, that fake SEs start

popping up.

SCENARIO B Status Quo

In a future where there are not only non-performing SEs but also positive government

influence, the following could reasonably occur:

o Opportunists begin to occur, taking advantage of short-term and readily available grants to

start (and stop) SEs. This becomes a serious waste of taxpayer money.

o We start to see more international SEs such as Dialogue in the Dark set up shop in

Singapore to avail themselves of the good support structures, and fill the vacuum of credible

local SEs.

o The image of SEs takes a hit, while SE-type activity migrates to the traditional charity sector.

SCENARIO C RegressionIn a future where there are not only non-performing SEs but also negative government

influence, the following could reasonably occur:

o We regress to the 1980s, to a time when things were less complicated. We begin to see

a clearer division between the charity and business sector.

o Less people get involved in SEs, but those that do will be fairly crazy and/or determined.

o Social impact is visibly reduced (Gini coefficient goes up), prompting the creation of

government-linked social enterprises, which may be unsustainable.

o CSR in Singapore becomes bigger, but also more of a public relations affair.

SCENARIO D Flying Solo

In a future where there are not only high impact SEs but also negative government influence,

the following could reasonably occur:

o SEs become sufficiently mature in their development to associate with each other

through a SE Chamber of Commerce (as HK has). Such an industry lobby would be able

to perform advocacy work on behalf of its members.

o Singapore-based SEs start moving to other countries, where they are better received.

8/9/2019 The Spore SE scene in year 2020

4/4

What does this mean?

We therefore end up with the following scenario planning for SEs in Singapore:

It is important to note that Future Thinking is not about predicting the future or gazing into a

crystal ball, but an educated guess about how important factors might influence the events to

come. It is, necessararily, a gross simplification of the many complexities of real life.

This document therefore does not offer any recommendations for how the SE scene should

evolve. It however, does aspire that, if we do want the SE scene to go somewhere, we have to

start by imagining what might be needed to get to that place. =)

+ve govtinfluence

-ve govtinfluence

HighimpactSEs

Non-performingSEs

The Hub

Status QuoRegresssion

Flying Solo