Monday, November 14, 2016

Connections for Good

Last week was the annual NetHope Summit.  It was also the US election.  I think that juxtaposition merits a closer look.  As humanitarians and conservationists we have learned to deal quickly and constructively with crises.  Here are three things we practice:

1) We go to where the crisis is.  When a disaster strikes, many of us are on planes heading to center of the storm within hours.  We carry equipment and know-how and are ready to help. Running for safety, shelter or solitude is not who we are.  We go to the fire.

2) We work together.  We know the strength of collaborating.  We do this with each other and especially with the the local people we serve.  We also work with a strong sensitivity to the local culture. Context matters to us.

3) We restore communications.  Connectivity is in our DNA.  People's need to communicate often rises above their need for food and shelter.  They need to know their loved ones are safe and to tell them they are safe.  They want to connect and help, and we help them do that.  We restore the voices of the broken and the lifelines of data.  We do not rest until citizens and responders alike are able to rejoin the conversation.

Imagine if we applied these principles at home, right now.  How might we behave differently?

"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."

Friday, November 4, 2016

On NetHope’s 15th Anniversary

As we gather for the 23rd NetHope Summit in Atlanta, I’d like to adjust back the clocks to October 2001 for just a moment, when we held our first summit in San Jose. Yes, it’s hard to believe, but we just passed our 15th anniversary!

A few weeks ago, the Basu’s invited the founding members, sponsors, fellows and guests to celebrate this 15th anniversary[1]. The group again gathered around Dipak and Radha’s table to share a meal and talk about our dreams. I was not able to make it this time, but sent my greetings in a video from Lisbon, where I am on sabbatical. I wish I had been there to raise a glass of Dipak’s wine in a toast to our successful venture in collaboration.

I’d like to reiterate the three things I shared. First, not being there is in itself a positive message. It means that the organization carries on, surviving its founders. I note that among the list of attendees at the dinner in 2001, most have moved on to other places. A few remained with NetHope or rejoined from other organizations, but most went on to other sectors.

In Jim Collins words, we have become clock builders rather than time-tellers; we have built an organization that makes it possible for others to interpret the times[2].

Second, breaking bread together around a kitchen table is intimate; it's personal. NetHope has been about relationships from the very beginning. Our fundamental value of trust depends on our friendships. While the setting of a small dinner is casual, collaboration is anything but casual; it runs deep. We believe in it. It is something we return to again and again.

I can picture our small group standing in Radha and Dipak’s kitchen last month 15 years ago. And an amazing thing is that our founding group of 7 NGOs will soon be 50.

Third, affirming our founding hypotheses. From the paper I presented at Cisco in 2001, the founding hypotheses continue to hold true:
  1. We had to be able to solve the “last mile” problems faster, cheaper, better if we did it together. 
  2. We would be a much stronger partner to the technology companies, on whom we depend, if we came as a group rather than the one-off, hat-in-hand organizations we had been.
NetHope is a collaboration that works, and it is clear that we are better together[3]

The potential of our collaboration was something Cisco saw from the start. We owe them a word of special thanks. Things tend not to hatch without some incubation. Cisco was our first incubator. Cisco, Microsoft and other partners been there since the early years helping all our members, and those we serve, through the NetHope relationship.

At an early Summit, I asked John Morgridge, then Cisco’s Chairman, who sat on a number of NGO boards, what frustrated him most about nonprofits? His answer: “That they don’t work together more, like you are doing at NetHope.” Working together and collaborating more is something we bring both to our nonprofit sector and our corporate partners. Let’s not forget that.

More importantly, we have become the example on how to collaborate in the nonprofit sector and with corporate partners. We have set the bar high. That’s something to be proud of. We now have a broader educational responsibility. The NetHope method of collaboration is something we can and should share.

In Conclusion, I’d like to share something I wrote when reflecting about NetHope a few years ago:

“This is how NetHope was born. There was an obvious and shared need, a scarcity of resources, and a desire to be part of a larger group that could gain some real momentum."[4]

We can celebrate this. We make connections for good. As I imagine turning the clocks forward in the spring, I look with even greater expectation to the next 15 years.

[1] Our first Summit in October, 2001 was with founding members STC, WVI, CARE, MC, CRS, WI, CI; Cisco hosted us on their San Jose campus.

[2] Jim Collins, Building Companies to Last”, Inc. Special Issue—The State of Small Business, 1995, with the headline “Make The Company Itself the Ultimate Product—Be A Clock Builder, Not A Time Teller”, here:

[3] This is the title of my active book project, which you can read on-line, here: . For some entertainment, listen to Jack Johnson’s “Better Together”, with lyrics, here:

[4] “We Are Better Together”, chapter 5.1,

"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."

Saturday, June 4, 2016

The Next Chapter

Dear Friends and Colleagues, 

I am pleased to announce that I have decided to take early retirement from IFRC. It's something I've planned carefully, with the welcome support of my USG over the past few months. 

I celebrated my 64th birthday last month, and mandatory retirement would be a year-away.  However, we completed our 5-year IT Strategy in 2015 and are in the midst of a strategy refresh process for 2016-2020. Under any scenario, I will not be here for its implementation.  If I were a new CIO coming into the IFRC, I would want a say in finalizing the IT strategy, and not be faced with reassessing it one-year into the plan; for IFRC, this would not be the best use of time and resources.  So the turn of this year was the right time to propose a new CIO come in earlier, finish the strategy work and own the new plan.

The CIO position has been posted on the IFRC job site. Please refer candidates here. (Note that the job closed on 21-June; announcements to follow by end-August).

My last day at office will be on Aug. 10th.  My wife and I will be moving to Lisbon until mid-December.  I will be working on finishing a few book projects and volunteering to help a colleague on a new NGO venture.  So the good work continues!

We look forward to being home for the holidays to celebrate with family and friends. Then the next chapter begins teaching at a university (still to be determined).   Thank you for your interest in and support of our IT and innovation work.  It has been an honor serve the RC Movement these past six years, and I have always believed that the best is yet to come.  So stay focused on the morning star. Best regards,


Edward G. Happ
Global CIO and Director of IT

“Even if you are on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there.”  --Will Rogers, American Humorist

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Route de Pré-Bois 1 | 1214 Vernier | Geneva | Switzerland
Tel. +41 (0)22 730 4365 | Mob. +41 (0)79 250 0558

Web Site: |Blog: | Twitter: @ehapp |SKYPE: eghapp
Saving lives, changing minds.
Find out more on

"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Strategy: Mainline or Disruptive?

A few weeks ago Kevin Delaney wrote an article on strategy that Quartz posted[1].  His premise, as his title says, is that no one should have the word “strategy” in their job title.  He gave two reasons: (1) the gap between strategy and execution is already too wide; (2) giving strategy to one dis-empowers the others. Solution: Focus on execution and its improvement, and encourage everyone to think strategically.

This sounds curiously similar to the arguments about innovation: we need the incremental improvements in operations, and everyone should be doing it.  But it is precisely the routine aspect of this that is dead wrong.

Four points to consider: first, strategy needs to rise above the routine and chart a course to a new destination.  Doing things we’ve always done, but a bit better, won’t cut it for a strategy, nor work in a rapidly changing world.  I’m reminded of the Gartner strategist who said we are getting good at landing planes, but at the wrong airport[2].

Second, not everyone is a strategic thinker. Marcus Buckingham and the folks at Gallop taught us that we all bring different strengths to the job[3].  This is not about elitism; it’s about leveraging the different strengths we have.  The connecting the dots and seeing around the corners of strategic thinking, is not for everyone.  It’s for people who think that way.  Finding these thinkers in your midst, and listening to them, is a leadership mandate.

Third, strategy can’t be delegated; it must be led.  If the captain can’t articulate the destination, you need a new captain.  That doesn’t mean the captain doesn’t have to listen, that they are always right.  That’s also dead wrong.  But if strategy is not led from the top, the organization won’t get out the harbor.

Fourth, strategy needs to focus on the few.  Trying to include everyone’s idea is a recipe for failure.  The adage that a camel is a horse designed by a committee is a case in point.  Nonprofit organizations, whose culture is to reach consensus, is another context to consider.  The “Big Umbrella”[4] approach lacks the focus to execute well—precisely one of Mr. Delaney’s critiques.

So is strategy a mainline activity, a trait and job for all; or is it something that disrupts the status quo and thinking-as-usual?  I’d put my bet on the latter.

"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."

[1] Kevin J. Delaney, “No one should have the word ‘strategy’ in their job title,” Quartz, May 12, 2016
[2] Dave Aron, VP of Research, Gartner Group, CCitDG Conference, October 8, 2009
[3] Marcus Buckingham and Donald O. Clifton, Now, Discover Your Strengths, January 29, 2001.  The authors note 34 themes from their broad-based research, of which “strategic” is one.  Buckingham would later say that expecting everyone to have the same strength is akin to expecting all members of an orchestra to play trombone.
[4] See the story of the “Big Umbrella” in my book project Letters to a Young Manager, here:

Monday, November 9, 2015

The Three Landing Strips

“[Many] organizations have great landings, but at the wrong airport.”  --Dave Aron, Gartner Group
In the past few weeks, I attended three meetings on Humanitarian innovation. The first posed the question of where do good ideas land? The second, where do proven ideas go to grow up and scale. And the third, how do successfully scaled pilots go mainstream.

This is a common set of questions and ready solutions exist in the for-profit world. Venture capital funds startups, and capital markets take them to scale[1]. But where do the means exist in the non-profit world?

There are some new models of nonprofit funding including social capital,[2] social entrepreneurs,[3] innovation contests[4] and a handful of innovation funds[5]. But the success stories are few.

An innovation center creates a place for good ideas and prototypes to land, and a runway for these to take-off and grow.

Following the above diagram, consider three inflection points: 

  1. Landing Good Ideas - What's needed is a receptive audience, a friendly landing place inside the organization that will protect and nurture experiments.
  2. Landing Pilots - Once ideas have proven themselves, there is a need for the second landing strip: where successful pilots go to take-off. This is about long term sustainability and growth that requires the next level of nurturing and funding. It also may mean handing off the innovation to the mainstream department or organization whose business it is to manage and apply this newly proven capability. For digital innovation it may mean a hand-off to a software company.
  3. Landing in the Mainstream - To truly have impact, our good ideas need to move from successful pilots, to going to scale, and finally to replacing old ways with new, as the production systems (process, program and tech) of our organization. 

Each of these landing strips requires advice, coordination and funding. But more importantly they require senior level commitment and protection.

The Nespresso case is an interesting example[6].  The Nespresso coffee making system was invented in 1976 by Eric Favre at Nestle.  However, it was not until 12 years later that it became a success and another 12 years until it became a high-growth product for Nestle.[7] A new product idea and prototype could not survive 24 years of development unless it was protected and championed, which is what John Paul Gaillard did. [8]

Avenues of Innovation Development

Development of a marketing-funnel approach to innovation—as illustrated in the figure above—provides a framework for growing innovation.  Consider the following means for “feeding” the funnel:

a)      Avenues for idea feeds
1)      Gathering problems to be solved and needs to be addressed, from the field
2)      Propose a variety solutions to be piloted
b)      Avenues for pilots
1)      Internally run experiments; internal venture fund
2)      Crowd-sourced to volunteer and technical communities (V&TC's) with best prototype awards
3)      An innovation lab to incubate pilots
c)       Avenues for scaling
1)      Partner with an internal “champion” department
2)      Internal venture fund II for next stage, larger initiatives
d)      Avenues for mainstreaming
1)      Transfers to production units; adoption: incremental or replacement
2)      Budget to operate

The point to this multi-stage approach, is that to get to a few mainstream innovations, you need to nurture the life-cycle of ideas-to-products. 

[1] For example, see the Wikipedia entry on Venture Capital,
[2] Olivia Khalili, “15 Social Venture Capital Firms That You Should Know About”, Cause Capitalism, April, 2010
[3] “What is a Social Entrepreneur?, Ashoka,
[4] Microsoft Imagine Cup student competition,
[5] Global Innovation Fund, and the Humanitarian Innovation Fund,
[6] For a brief history of Nespresso, see
[7] “In August 2010, it was reported that Nespresso sales have been growing at an average of 30 percent per year over the past 10 years and more than 20 billion capsules have been sold since 2000…”, Wikipedia,
[8] Also see the interesting Case Study on Nespresso, here  The case notes that developing Nespresso in a separate subsidiary also had a large role in its success.

"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent positions, strategies or opinions of any of the organizations with which I am associated."

Friday, July 31, 2015

Making New Connections

One of the things we do well at NetHope is making connections. Whether it's connecting first responders in Nepal, or connecting technology people with each other, "wiring" people together is in our founding DNA.

As I walked the showcase at this year's Imagine Cup I was looking for opportunities to match-up ideas and people. Two teams had alert apps to report threats of violence: UAE and Germany. Each had some good designs that the other team lacked. I encouraged each to spend time with the other team and share ideas. When the goal is  helping people, projects need to be an "and" rather than an "or."

The Japanese innovation team had a virtual air interface that reminded me of Tim Prentice, an award winning sculptor in Connecticut who builds mobiles that change appearance with wind. I showed the students the video. They were hooked. So I connected them. Artists and technology designers may be strange bedfellows. But creativity knows no such boundaries. Can-do students are open to learn from anywhere.

The UK innovation team had a cool Microsoft Band app to exchange contact info by shaking hands at events rather than handing out business cards.  Their app reminded me of a Social Network Analysis study for mapping the hidden gurus in an organization, an app near to my interest in Expertise Management. The students' eyes widened as he began to think about this other possibility for their technology. So I recommended looking up the research paper.

Making connections is something I enjoy. I've written about it before, here. It's cool to find some new examples. But that's what happens when you bring people together. The connections flourish among ideas, projects and people. One of our mottos is to "share and do". Make something happen together. 

The Tech at Hand

I've had the honor of being a Microsoft Imagine Cup Judge since 2008 --I'm officailly an old-timer trading stories with the elders of this august event.  Sitting together in the judges lounge yesterday, I remarked to a fellow judge how each Imagine Cup seems to feature projects with at least one new technology.  In Cairo it was the Windows phone, in New York it was the Kinect box, and here in Redmond this year it was the Microsoft Wristband.  Why was that?

Some investigation yielded the answer: the software development kit (SDK) that the students received at the start of competition last fall included the new Wristband.  Of course the students wanted to write apps for it!  Smart.

Everyone is talking about wearables.  Even those of us in the humanitarian sector are talking about wearable technologies.  In the World Citizenship category, 4 of the 12 teams incorporated the Band.  All were health applications.  Motion and heart-rate sensing were the basic inputs for Parkinsons, Cardio-arithmia, asthma and seizure detection apps.

The interesting aspect of this is how the expectation has grown that the students will create new apps around the new tech.  I've written about the five things students don't have. The most important is they have no sense of limitation. There is no "that won't work here"; there is only "let's do it!"

What if we had similar expectations for the emerging country communities in which we work as humanitarians?  That putting the technology and some basic training and support into the hands of local entrepreneurs just may yield some new ideas that we hadn't thought of.  Imagine that.