Water coolers: Where is all happens in Canadian culture

Canadian office culture may not seem intimidating, but if you’re a new Canadian, your qualifications and global experience may not be enough to move ahead in your career. Understanding the value of small-talk in the office can be paramount to progressing into a management position. That’s where MaRS client KIOSK steps in.

KIOSK offer English as a Second Language (ESL) communications solutions and specialized language camps, helping new Canadians who have  skills to integrate into the workplace.

Statistics Canada reported in March that Toronto’s visible minority population  could more than double from 2.3 million in 2006 to nearly 5.6 million by 2031. This means the work of organizations like KIOSK will only become more important with each passing year — for immigrants and businesses alike.

Recently, KIOSK won an Information and Communication Technology Council (ICTC) tender. This will allow it to expand its self-directed, online training programs and to develop a diagnostic assessment tool for professionals in the IT and Communications (ICT) field who want to immigrate to Canada. This tool will help KIOSK clients evaluate their language skill proficiencies within the context of five specific ICT professions.  Perhaps more importantly, the diagnostic will also assess their understanding of Canadian business culture.

“The water cooler talk example seems to come up quite a lot in discussions with our group,” Jorge Ulloa, Vice-President of KIOSK Language Centre, told me when we spoke. “Newcomers often don’t understand the concept or benefits of networking and socializing in the workplace. In some cases they come from work cultures that expect you to punch in and be productive, while all socializing takes place after work hours. In Canada,  networking often plays an important role in determining the projects that you’ll be chosen for and the people that you will be working with.  Our corporate clients often look to us for intervention in addressing communication breakdowns and challenges surrounding a diverse list of issues such as cross hierarchical informal discussions, receiving/giving feedback, negotiation tactics, leading meetings and presentations, small talk and slang, gender and cultural issues and much more.”

KIOSK’s clients also appreciate getting an early start on solving these challenges. “The process (of immigration) can take anywhere between one to three years before the individual arrives in Canada,” Jorge said. “That’s very valuable time that we can take advantage of and get people up to par in their English skills and cultural awareness.” Back in 2004, Statistics Canada revealed that almost 7% of ICT immigrants who came to Canada in the 1990s re-emigrated. This percentage represented close to 50,000 ICT workers who came and left again.

Jorge says the main reason for this migration pattern is that new Canadians feel they don’t have the same opportunities as their Canadian-born colleagues. In evaluating everything from compensation packages to professional development, these highly-trained ICT professionals feel that there are more appealing opportunities in other markets.

“One of the attractive methods offered to us at MaRS, which KIOSK strongly supports, is the collaborative approach to creating innovative and effective solutions,” said Jorge. “From the private sector perspective, it hasn’t generally been the tradition to collaborate with the public sector, government and other individuals in the community. From our perspective, it’s been great to open up dialogue between ourselves and our community partners, to figure out ways of working together to improve the experience for our clients and the integration of new Canadians into the economy and society as a whole.”

KIOSK values their relationship with MaRS and, indeed, its presence in Canada, but knows the future can still provide challenges.  According to Jorge, Canada does an excellent job of offering bridging programs and an overall support system that helps newcomers integrate and understand the educational and professional job opportunities available. However, newcomers continue to face various barriers and obstacles that needs to be addressed in order for Canada to continue its role as a global leader and competitor.

“It’s no longer about just being functional in English or French,” he cautioned. “It’s about possessing leadership qualities — the communications skills and cultural component that are key to the long-term success of your professional career. That shouldn’t be overlooked. After investing so much time in your education, after being exposed to so much great international experience, why not complement that with the communication skills and business culture awareness that will help overcome future workplace barriers and obstacles?”

In the end, KIOSK clients feel the main benefit provided by their training is confidence. Jorge describes it as the moment the light turns on, giving somebody the inside-track view. “The impact that it has on our clients is life-changing, at least from a professional development perspective. And having the opportunity to play a role in such an important moment in our clients’ lives gives us a high level of satisfaction.”

KIOSK has a current project under review with Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) for the Online Communication Skills for Professionals training of new Canadians in Ontario.  If the bid is successful, this project will be the first of its kind — leveraging cutting-edge, online distance education technologies for the benefit of newcomers across the province.

To lean more about KIOSK, their current ICTC project, and more, please visit their website.

Is this sandbox just for the big kids?

The Social Innovation Fund (SIF), a White House effort to pump millions of private and public dollars into projects that are effectively tackling pressing social problems, awarded its first round of grants this month, totaling nearly $50 million.

The Corporation for National and Community Service, which operates the SIF, announced 11 grants – ranging in size from $2 million to $10 million each – to intermediary organizations, which will in turn award money to non-profit groups working in the areas of economic opportunity, youth development and healthy habits. Seen as a breakthrough announcement by a new kind of President in 2009, the Fund has understandably attracted attention from the non-profit community in the US as well as north of the border.

“Over the long-term, the SIF will contribute to the development of the grant-making infrastructure that supports the work of high-impact non-profit organizations and inform other federal, state and local efforts to address social challenges,” said Paul Carttar, Director of the SIF at the Corporation. “It offers an avenue for community-driven solutions to grow and demonstrate their value.”

However, the SIF’s focus on funding experienced intermediary organizations with proven track records is a disappointment to some. Nathaniel Whittemore, writing for the popular blog, Change.org says, “The results show the SIF is primarily focused on ‘funding what works’ versus making more risky bets. I tend to think that the relative smallness of the amount of resources being deployed lend themselves well to this being the ’sandbox space’ where the government could support really experimental efforts that could have disruptive potential.”

Despite Nathaniel Whittemore’s lamentation on missed opportunities, there is still time to see transformation with the allocation of these funds. It’s also important to note that this is the first round of the SIF. It doesn’t surprise me that a new Office with a new fund felt only so daring in the distribution of their grants. Perhaps they’ll exercise more courage in the future.

What it does mean for this first round of grantees is that the innovation baton has passed to them. In the distribution of their award money, will they support proven programs or look to more risky but potentially more scalable, more impactful projects?

Perhaps some of these intermediary bodies, now charged with distributing millions of grant dollars could look to the work of the J.W. McConnell Foundation here in Canada. The Foundation acknowledges that the not-for-profit sector receives little encouragement to be risky. “‘Innovation’ normally means doing things better, smarter, more efficiently. In business, it is a given; it receives constant encouragement in the form of training, investment and public attention.”

“The not-for-profit or public benefit sector sees no such support: there are many social entrepreneurs but most funders seek ’safe’ projects. There is little risk-capital and even less willingness to accept some ‘failure’ as the price of path-breaking innovation.” In contrast to many foundations, McConnell are particularly interested in disseminating proven local projects that demonstrate the potential to trigger transformative change. McConnell’s work with Social Innovation Generation (SiG) is an active example of their dedication to experimentation and facilitating a social innovation agenda in Canada.

But let’s not ignore the Canadian government in this discussion. The Canadian government may not have announced a Social Innovation Fund, but there are positive indications that they are looking seriously at social innovation and how to apply its principles. The Policy Research Initiative released a paper in April called, “‘Social Innovation’: What is it? Who does it?” While the paper asks more questions than it answers, it is a step in the right direction.

See here for a full list of the Social Innovation Fund recipients.

Andy Grove sounds the alarm about innovation

By dropping the social in innovation, is North America breaking the innovation chain?

Andy Grove, a co-founder of Intel and a Silicon Valley icon, is sounding two alarms about innovation’s future. Both flow from his disagreement with the accepted article of faith that the US tech sector necessarily should focus high-end jobs in the US and export manufacturing jobs.

One alarm is that US innovation is dropping the ball in job creation. By exporting manufacturing offshore to Asia, the United States is focusing on start-ups.  “Start-ups are a wonderful thing,” says Grove in a recent essay in Bloomberg Businessweek, “But they cannot by themselves increase tech employment.”

Grove challenges that notion that “shipping jobs overseas is no big deal because the high-value work — and much of the profits — remain in the US. But what kind of society are we going to have if it consists of highly paid people doing high-value-added work — and masses of unemployed?”

Grove’s second alarm is that, by not having hi-tech manufacturing at close hand, the US innovation chain becomes broken by not participating in scale-up.  Equally important as start-up is the point when “technology goes from prototype to mass production. This is the phase where companies scale up. They work out design details, figure out how to make things affordably, build factories and hire people by the thousands. Scaling is hard work but necessary to make innovation matter.”

With hi-tech firms like Apple, Seagate and Dell, for every US worker they employ, their suppliers have 10 people working overseas on their behalf.

Besides losing US jobs, Grove says the US “broke the chain of experience that is so important to technology’s evolution.” He cites the example of batteries.  “What microprocessors are to computing, batteries are to electric vehicles. Unlike with microprocessors, the US share of the lithium-ion battery production is tiny… As happened with batteries, abandoning today’s ‘commodity’ manufacturing can lock you out of tomorrow’s emerging industry.”

Grove argues that when individual businesses make decisions to transfer manufacturing and a great deal of engineering out of the US, they have “hindered our ability to bring innovations to scale at home. Without scaling… we lose our hold on new technologies. Losing the ability to scale will ultimately damage our capacity to innovate.”

Grove recognizes that the remarkable growth of Asian manufacturing was the direct outcome of Asian states’ economic policies that said that the number-one objective was job creation.

Learning from their success, Grove calls for “job-centric economic theory — and job-centric political leadership — to guide our plans and actions.” Making a suggestion that will be seen as heretical by many, Grove is advocating for a tax on the product of offshore labour. He says the resulting money should be segregated and used to fund a Scaling Bank of the US. SBUS would make the capital available to companies scaling their US operations.  All this, says Grove, would be in aid of rebuilding of America’s “industrial commons”.

Grove’s understanding of the value of an integrated innovation chain seems highly consistent with Ontario’s recent large-scale commitment to renewable energy and its market-making deal with Samsung.

But Grove’s analysis and recommendations will also be sober reading for Canadians interested in our innovation future for two reasons:

1. His views are an acute critique of how incremental decisions (like outsourcing) might erode a country’s innovation prowess over time
2. The implications of these views are dangerous for Canada if the US goes protectionist

Andy Grove’s views are always worth reading. In his recent Bloomberg Businessweek essay, he places the social implications of innovation policy front and centre — and underscores the fact that all innovation is fundamentally social.

Sir Ronald Cohen talks about social finance

In a recent article in the Telegraph, Sir Ronald Cohen, the “father of private equity” in the UK and founder of Apax Partners, is quoted as saying “An important part of the capitalist system is having a powerful social sector to address social issues.”

Those of us interested in social finance in Canada have long looked to the UK in general, and the work of Sir Ronald Cohen in particular, for advice and direction. Sir Ronald (as he is affectionately called) recently addressed student at Harvard Business School telling the students about the next big thing in the business world – social finance.

“If I had been leaving Harvard in 2010, this would be the area I would want to be going into,” says Sir Ronald. About one-fifth of recent Harvard Business School graduates agree given that they have been drawn to “social enterprise-type organizations.”

Sir Ronald’s goal is to connect the capital markets to the social sector. “It is not enough to increase the standard of living at the high end. It is right at the same time to worry about those who are left behind,” he says.

It would be a shame to waste the economic crisis that we have just endured and not learn lessons from it. Sir Ronald offers the following reflection and I would suggest hope that “societies everywhere will come to the conclusion that an important part of the capitalist system is having a powerful social sector to address social issues, because government doesn’t have the resources.”

Sir Ronald and his colleagues have formed an organization appropriately called “social finance” and have come up with the concept of a Social Impact Bond – “a contract between a public sector body and Social Impact Bond investors,” in which the former commits to pay for an improved social outcome. Investor funds are used to pay for a range of interventions to improve the social outcome.

“By enabling non-government investment to be utilized, Social Impact Bonds will lead to greater spending on preventative services. These interventions can have a direct impact on costly health and social problems.

“Social Impact Bonds are a unique funding mechanism, in that they align the interests of key stakeholders around social outcomes”.

We are closely watching the development of social impact bonds in the UK to determine their possible applicability in Canada. For more information on this concept see the UK Social Finance commission’s “Social Impact Bonds”.

But one thing we and Sir Ronald want to make clear is that this is not to be confused with privatization. “It is not a privatization because it isn’t being shifted to the private sector,” he says. “It is moving to an entrepreneurial approach to deal with these issues.”

Forty years ago, Sir Ronald revolutionized private equity in the UK. Let’s hope he is as successful in his efforts to promote social finance and those of us in Canada interested in mobilizing increased capital for those in engaged in social purpose work will be right with him.

Coming soon to Ontario?

If you have an early stage social venture or you’re still at the conceptual stage, the School for Social Entrepreneurs (SSE) may be of interest to you.  It is a one-year program that will train you to use your abilities in effective ways to set up a social enterprise or social purpose business – developing your abilities and your venture plan at the same time.

Ready to sign up? Not just yet.

The SSE is not yet operational in Ontario. Having started in London, the SSE is now operational throughout the UK and recently in Australia.  Is it time to bring this program to Ontario?

That’s what we at SiG@MaRS wanted to determine and so with the support of the Ontario Trillium Foundation we conducted a feasibility study to determine:

• How the SSE in the UK began and what it offers
• Would a franchise of the SSE suit and thrive in Ontario?
• Should Ontario develop its own similar program or should it join the SSE network?

In 2009, MASS LBP was contracted to conduct the feasibility study.  They completed a report based on literature reviews, interviews both locally and internationally, as well as five community consultations. The conclusion and recommendation drawn from the study was that “Ontario would benefit from a program focused on social impact and providing an alternative pathway to the acquisition of entrepreneurial skills.”

The recommendations and next steps were discussed at the SiG@MaRS Information Session held in March 2010. Based on the findings of the study, SiG@MaRS is developing an advisory committee for a program tailored to the needs of social entrepreneurs in Ontario.

If you’re interested in the “School for Social Entrepreneurs in Ontario” report including the Executive Summary, both can be viewed here at the MASS LBP website.

You’re also welcome pick up a hard copy of both documents at the SiG@MaRS office.

Have an interest in this initiative?  Please contact Cheryl May at cmay@marsdd.com for more information.

Lucy Bernholz, author of Philanthropy2173

So says Lucy Bernholz, author of Philanthropy2173. This popular blog was named the best blog in its category by Fast Company and if you’re like me, you have the blog updating automatically on your iGoogle page. Understanding the changing world of philanthropy and the nature of giving is a quest for many foundations and charitable organizations. The need to understand is only amplified by the increasing demand on people’s generosity.

Referred to often as the “global threat set,” climate change, drought, food shortage, population growth and aging will draw on human and financial resources with increasing intensity. Keeping pace with this threat set is vital. Lucy Bernholz is at the vanguard of these changing times.

In her recently released book, Disrupting Philanthropy – co-authored with Edward Skloot and Barry Varela, Bernholz explores the immediate and longer-term implications of networked digital technologies for philanthropy. As they explain, 10 years ago the landscape of philanthropy was relatively simple. “There were foundations – private, community, and corporate – that awarded grants to non-profits. Givers gathered information about non-profits mainly through word-of-mouth.  Commercial investment firms were relatively small players on the philanthropic landscape.” In 2010 the landscape is very different.

While philanthropy may need honesty and humour, it also needs to be aware of the technological tools that can support its longevity and effectiveness. “The outline of philanthropy’s future is visible in online, shared portfolios of loans, as well as informal networks of volunteers working to aid disaster relief. It’s visible in commercial firms seeking social missions. It’s visible on shared platforms for measures of social return and in peer networks of individual donors. It’s visible in foundation-led explorations of networked governance models and in community-based experiments with local fundraisers networked across time zones.”

It’s visible everywhere. But where is it headed? What is the net outcome of this movement online? How are philanthropic organizations keeping pace? The McConnell Family Foundation is making some headway towards answering these questions, particularly through their work with the Framework Foundation’s, Anil Patel. How many other foundations are taking a wait-and-see approach?

Technology offers us many opportunities. As Lucy Bernholz concludes, “Just a few years ago we could not have imagined using dispersed networks of cell phones to report on earthquake damage and relief operations.” In recent memory similar efforts were only just made possible online after Hurrican Katrina. During Net Change Week in Toronto, Lucy Bernholz will join John Thackara and Dr. Gerri Sinclair on a panel to discuss the “Future of the Web and the World.” Moderated by TVO’s Jesse Brown, the discussion will explore the future of philanthropy, the future of food security and the future of education. Register to participate in the discussion here.

For further insight about the impact of technology on economic and democratic progress you can also register to see Professor Iqbal Z. Quadir. Professor Quadir is the founder and director of the Legatum Center for Development and Entrepreneurship at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and founder of Grameenphone Limited in Bangladesh. For nearly twenty years, he has been advocating for the use of mobile phones to empower ordinary people in low-income countries and for commerce-based solutions for their advancement. Professor Quadir will speak at the MaRS Centre on Wednesday June 9 at 5pm. Register for Professor Quadir here.

This post originally appeared on www.socialfinance.ca

Winners of the 2010 Up-Start Competition

Last week, 11 entrepreneurs had the opportunity to pitch their business plans to a panel of judges in the fifth annual Up-Start Competition. Designed as a culmination of CIBC Presents Entrepreneurship 101, entrepreneurs had 10 minutes to pitch their ideas, vying for a $10,000 prize.

The winner was Shape Collage, an online photo-collage application that has experienced remarkable success in the past year with over 1.5 million downloads. Founder Vincent Cheung was also honoured last week as the Student Entrepreneur National Champion in the Advancing Canadian Entrepreneurship Expo in Calgary.

Vincent Cheung of Shape Collage pitches

“I’m doing my PhD in computer engineering,” Cheung says in a Calgary Herald story. “I had no business background. It’s great to win and I learned a lot about the business side.” Much of that business experience Cheung learned at MaRS through the CIBC Presents Entrepreneurship 101 course and working closely with MaRS Advisors.

Although the limelight is currently shining on Shape Collage, every year the Up-Start Competition launches many other growing businesses.

Janet Markle, CEO of Groundswell Innovations, was recently awarded a grant from the Government of Ontario to continue her work in developing a web platform for companies to crowd-source scientific problems to eager grad students.

In March, Herman Lo from ViewsIQ received $5,000 from the YORKbiotech’s sanofi pasteur Healthcare and Biotechnology Venture Challenge for his system which maps out what a pathologist sees through a microscope in real-time.

The social venture Well of Change has been getting a lot of attention for their web platform where buyers can purchase services from volunteers (everything from knitting lessons to tree-trimming) with all the money going to charity.

One of the strengths of the Up-Start Competition is the wide range of businesses represented. Other highlights included:

• Daniel Bida’s plan to kick-start biogas co-ops in rural Canada through his company, ReGenerate Biogas;

• Gopal Valsan’s one-camera motion capture system, perfect for physiotherapy and gaming applications;

• Armour Therapeutics’ Josh Silvertown is in the process of developing a new class of drugs to slow the development of prostate cancer;

• United Farms Organic has developed a system to turn the nutrients from your compost scraps into fertilizer for your house-plants;

• James Standen’s data analysis software nModal seeks to fill a gap in the market between smaller programs like Excel and giant data crunching machines like Oracle.

• MyWebVine is a system for businesses to manage their referral programs;

• Reel Work is a web platform for students to explore career options by watching videos and looking at stats from real world workers.

Start on your business plans for next year – the way things are going, the competition is going to be fierce for Up-Start 2011.

Post-Skoll: Flying safely past Eyjafjallajökull ash

I have a new favourite noise: the sweet sound of planes overhead. After 12 memorable days in the UK, it was delectable to finally touch down in TO, flying safely by the falling ash from Eyjafjallajökull.

While my journey involved meetings with several social finance organizations and attending the Skoll World Forum on social entrepreneurship, many unexpected events reaped great rewards. Where else but in the shadow of the ash cloud could you partake in Tedx Volcano and ad hoc meetings across London organized by stranded social innovators? In all cases, fascinating people and rich learning was threaded throughout.

One of the hottest topics at Skoll was social finance.

Much of the content fell under the banner of impact investing (also referred to as social investment or sustainable investment). Impact investing is defined as “actively placing capital in businesses and funds that generate social and/or environmental good and a range of returns, from principal to above market, to the investor.” (As per the Monitor Institute.) The primary goal of this investment approach is that by leveraging the private sector, these investments can provide solutions at a scale that pure philanthropic interventions cannot.

While there were numerous examples of impact investing presented at Skoll, I will highlight four particularly compelling ones here that offer a range of approaches.

Shorebank
Laurie Spengler, CEO of ShoreBank International, profiled a deal that they structured for BRAC (Bangladesh Rural Action Committee), a large NGO focused on using microfinance to transition people out of poverty. For context, Shorebank is the first and largest community development bank (CDB) in the US with $2.1 billion in assets. The BRAC deal included a group of investors with a spectrum of return expectations. What made it innovative was Shorebank’s ability to fairly quickly raise $63 million through 13 investors with varying risk profiles–65% was sold on a commercial coupon basis (8% coupon) and 35% in the second tranche (5% return with a possible kicker at the end). Many of the investors were willing to invest in both groups, taking a bigger discount on the financial side because they believed in the strong social impact of the opportunity.

John McCall MacBain Foundation

John McCall MacBain started a foundation in his name after selling his classified ad company. He feels strongly that too many foundations separate their granting side from their investing side. Uniquely, the granting work of his foundation often leads to clear investment opportunities and vice versa. One example involved grant-making in Liberia where the foundation was focused on reducing infant mortality in hospitals. While investigating hospital spending, MacBain discovered that 50% of expenses were electricity costs. The foundation then considered how they could offer electricity more cheaply and reliably. Buchanan Renewables was born.

Using foundation capital, they bought a company that was chipping end-of-life rubber trees for export and created a plant that could produce power from these chips. In addition to employment growth, the energy produced was then provided domestically at a cheaper rate and far cleaner than previously generated.

Bridges Social Entrepreneurs Fund
Ilse Treurnicht and I met with Bridges Ventures’ Executive Director, Michele Giddens while in London to explore models for social venture-type funds for Canada. One of Bridges’ newest funds is definitely worth highlighting.

UK-based Bridges Social Entrepreneurs Fund describes itself as addressing the funding gap often faced by fast-growing social enterprises looking to scale. Since launching in November 2008, the fund has raised £9 million for investment in scalable social enterprises. This is the third Bridges fund (the first raised £40 million and the second raised £75 million) but is distinct in a couple ways. The first two funds sought market rate returns and invested in entrepreneurial businesses that were either located in deprived neighbourhoods or had a social or environmental impact. In addition, the investors in those funds included banks, pension funds and wealthy individuals. The Social Entrepreneurship Fund is targeting returns in the 3-5% range and has attracted more foundations, government dollars as well as individuals (funds have been raised through a mixture of donations and investments).

This fund is being viewed as a model for other countries (including Canada) so it will be interesting to watch this space.

Social Impact Bond, presented by Social Finance
A new vehicle, referred to as the Social Impact Bond is currently being piloted by a social investment bank in the UK called Social Finance .

The bond is a contract with the public sector in which it commits to pay for improved social outcomes that result in public sector savings. The expected savings are used as a basis for raising investment for prevention and early intervention services that improve social outcomes. To give a concrete example, Social Finance has just launched a pilot focused on reducing re-offending rates in the UK. They have brokered a deal between the Ministry of Justice and St. Giles Trust which has a strong track record of reducing recidivism in short-sentence male prisoners. Essentially, if the planned outcomes are achieved (the initiative reduces re-offending by 7.5% or more), investors will receive a share of the consequent savings to government.

This innovative financing tool has been discussed in Canada to improve outcomes around issues that have historically lacked funding for prevention or early intervention. Members of Social Innovation Generation (SiG) have met with the team at Social Finance UK and are closely watching this pilot and others as they are being launched. It’s definitely an exciting idea with potentially broad reaching implications.

While impact investing is still an emerging area, these examples illustrate that investors are emerging across asset classes and are combining creativity in financing with the desire to achieve social impact. In fact, an excellent report was just published called Investing For Impact which captures 20 case studies of impact investors globally doing some extraordinary work. None of the examples are Canadian, but at SiG we are working on supplementing these cases with local examples and will be sure to post them here.

How can social innovators adopt strategic tech?

When it comes to social and mobile technology, the question is no longer whether or not we should be using it, but rather, how can we adopt it in a strategic way?  And how can social innovators use it to create greater impact?

Net Change 2010, powered by MaRS, is week-long series of events launching June 7^th. It will explore the intersection between technology and social change. And the opportunities this intersection presents.

Monday through Wednesday, you can get dedicated training in online and mobile strategic communication. Thursday and Friday, challenge your thinking about how technology can be designed for positive social change in the future. Canadian and international digital media and technology experts will discuss the repercussions of speedy adoption of online technology along with critical observations about our current social context.

Over 2,000 people will attend the week’s events. How do you want to get involved?

1. Dynamic digital art show: Net Change will be an immersive experience with the help of digital art installations, with which participants can interact. Want to submit your work to be displayed at MaRS? Send us ideas!
2. Future lab: Three pre-selected project ideas will enter into the lab, where teams will have less than 48hrs to come up with game plans for how the ideas will be realized out in the world. Judges will pick the winning idea in front of a live audience. Do you have a wicked problem – or are you interested in solving one? Sign up here!
3. Roving reporters & Buzz builders: Net Change Agents will be capturing all the action through Live Tweeting, Blogging and with video cameras. Want to help us build the buzz? Let us know!
4. Digital Literacy Education: Last year, material captured at Net Change was re-purposed for TVO’s suite of digital literacy shorts.  We are committed to the ongoing use of our content for this purpose. Interested in our content? Be in touch!

You might just be interested in the all-star line-up of speakers, including:

• Professor Iqbal Quadir, founder of Grameenphone, is our distinguished keynote on Wednesday night for “Mobile Tech and the Global Threat Set”
• CBC’s Jesse Hirsh will moderate a discussion on Cybersecurity, featuring Dr. Ann Cavoukian, Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario and Ronald Deibert, Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of the Citizen Lab at UofT’s Munk Centre for International Studies
• Sounding off on the Future Panel: Dr. Gerri Sinclair, Director of BC’s Digital Media Centre, Dr. Lucy Bernholz, Founder and President of Blueprint Research and Design Inc., and John Thackara, Author of In The Bubble: Designing In A Complex World
• Don Tapscott, Author of Wikinomics, will discuss for the first time, his latest tome; MacroWikinomics
• Beth Kanter, named: “One of the most influential women in technology” by Fast Company Magazine, opens the My Charity Connects event

Whether you want to learn the skills and get the tools needed to build your own digital media strategy, hear from experts on how safe our information really is, or simply looking for networking opportunities in the social innovation space, there is something for everyone.  Don’t miss out!  Check the calendar here and register today!

You’re invited! Check out our digital short and pass it on!

Who comes to Net Change? This and other questions answered here.

Follow us on Twitter @Netchange and be in touch at info@netchangeweek.com.

Net Change 2010: You’re invited! from SiG @ MaRS on Vimeo.

Television: Now with 100% more social web!

TV: it’s not just on TVs anymore! It’s no surprise that viewers are using different devices to watch.

Do you ever watch television and surf the net at the same time? Then you might already be sharing your thoughts about TV programs on social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter. Social TV, through which people exchange opinions about the content, is a fast-growing trend.

After nearly 75 years of television sets being at the heart of the living room, the focus is shifting away from the box to take in other technology in the home. Anyone with a web connection, computer and access to the same TV channels can share comments live during a broadcast. This instant communication is adding an interactive element to the viewing experience.

Social TV has the potential to radically change TV viewing from a passive, somewhat solitary experience to something more dynamic and interactive.

Mobile apps

Mobile phone apps provide a platform for commenting on TV programs and social networks are making shared online discussions mainstream. Bespoke applications geared to sharing thoughts and views on TV shows are appearing on a variety of different devices.

A good example is TV Chatter (a free iPhone app) which offers a real-time stream of tweets. While watching TV, users can launch the app to choose a show from the social program guide and add their own comments if they have a Twitter account.

Avatar parties

In the UK’s social TV scene, Xbox has a deal with broadcaster Sky for streaming TV. Viewers who pay a subscription fee for this service can watch entire programs with online friends and interact via avatars and voice chat.

The console’s Emote system allows these avatars to express particular emotions like happiness or anger as reaction to the onscreen action. Emoticons and text have pretty much been the preferred communications method for social TV.

TV add-ons

Boxee is a service that started out as an online social media centre for use with a PC or Apple TV and has now made the leap to set top box device. Free software for the service can be downloaded to a PC and, with a set top box being released later in 2010,  TV shows, movies, pictures and music will be available to users. Deals have been struck with US content providers and content available for legal download can also be shared and discussed with friends.

Other firms, such as Verizon, have already integrated social media – such as Facebook and Twitter – into its TV systems. It plans to carry on enhancing the social experience through widgets and features including an onscreen keyboard to send tweets.

By the end of 2010 people will be able to talk and see others live on their television via Skype.