Consulting and support for social enterprise in Canada

Page 2 of 6

The peril of social entrepreneurship

March 19, 2020 / jonathanawade / Comments Off

Even the most potent idea will be watered down to nothing if you put it in a turbulent sea.

Social Delta is in the business of helping organizations and individuals create business solutions to social problems. We believe in social entrepreneurship as one possible, powerful tool to sustainably create change. But we don’t believe in fads nor do we believe that social change happens because one person thinks that they have developed a quick fix.

Increasingly, we meet and work with young people (ages 14-40) wanting to become social entrepreneurs out of a sense of disenfranchisement in the free market economy, buffeted about by political fictions and misinformation, and feeling either beaten or inspired by their perception of the world going off the rails.

When we work with these new, or aspiring, social entrepreneurs, we want them to grasp a few basic concepts before they launch into their dream career:

Be ready to work harder than ever. Social entrepreneurship is hard work and 99% of the time has very little glamor. Starting and maintaining any business is hard, but starting and maintaining a business with a non-negotiable social bottom line is very hard work.
You are not the solution. Social change can be catalysed by individuals, but it is created by many people, often working in an imperfect cauldron of partnership, competition and collaboration.
Anything you can think of has (likely) been thought of before. Our best piece of advice for new social entrepreneurs is: study what others have done and are doing to address the social concern that is the foundation of your business. It is shocking what an internet search will reveal. Years of study and learning about the issues and the root causes of the social problem are often necessary for you to truly understand why the issue is so hard to solve. Sometimes it is better–as in more effective–to join and existing team of passionate social actors than to create your own business.
Be prepared for the long haul. An app will not solve plastic waste problems. A year of selling coffee will not save a youth at risk from addictions. A single day hack-a-thon (sic) will not solve poverty in your community. Intractable social problems are called intractable for a reason: they often have no quick or easy solution. If you are choosing a career in social enterprise, you will more than likely need to devote multiple years (perhaps a lifetime) to realize the change you envision. We live in a world motivated by expediency, but social change of any sort doesn’t happen overnight…even with a business mindset.
Don’t be fooled by success stories. Every social enterprise is on the knife edge of survival, and success is both a relative term, and a difficult status to maintain. Rather than lauding the successes of contemporaries, learn from their daily challenges and seek to maximize your own social impact.
Measure what you are doing. From day one, set measurable social goals and evaluate if you are doing the best you can to address the social problem that inspires your business. Measurement has to include both business indicators like sales or inventory levels, but more important is to set social goals and measure if you are getting close to them. If not, you’ll likely need to change your operational (business) decisions to ensure that your social mission is, in fact, being served best.

We recommend that every new social entrepreneur read a recent Stanford Social Innovation Review article entitled “Tackling Heropreneurship.” The author expresses concern that social enterprise is becoming so fashionable that it is—like a potent idea in a turbulent sea—being watered down by those who want fame, fortune and a better world crafted by their own hands.

Building a social enterprise requires a balance of egotism and altruism. You need to be self-confident, committed, and something of an idealist. However, at the same time, you need to be humble, patient, collaborative and willing to rely on the efforts of others.

Social entrepreneurship should be considered less of a career and more of a calling, and in our experience, academic institutions, media, government and intermediary organizations are increasingly spouting that entrepreneurship is THE new tool for solving social problems. As a result, many of our most idealistic young colleagues are not fully understanding the social fabric that needs to be changed before they embark on their personal entrepreneurial journey to change it.

Social Delta provides Investment Readiness Program (IRP) consulting

January 21, 2020 / jonathanawade / Comments Off

The Government of Canada has launched the Investment Readiness Program, which provides non-repayable financing (also known as grants!) of between $10,000 and $100,000 to help social purpose businesses grow.

This is a landmark commitment to social finance and investing in the social economy of Canada by the federal government. All social enterprises–both new and seasoned–should learn more about this program in order to apply for the grants to build their capacity to be ready to accept social investments (loans, share capital) in order to grow their business, and generate greater positive social impact in our communities.

For more than a decade, Social Delta has been providing the type of consulting that is eligible for funding under this program. Contact us to discuss how we can help you access and effectively use these newly available funds to start or scale your social enterprise.

The IRP is available for social enterprises and social purpose organizations regardless of how they’ve been incorporated. Non-profits, co-operatives, and private sector businesses with a social mission are all eligible. If you are in business (or want to be in business) to create social value, this program can help you kick start your mission based company. There a five organizations administering the grant applications and one of those organizations, the Community Foundations of Canada, offers a very useful FAQ document that can be downloaded here.

This is not a grant to cover your operational expenses. However, it is money that is available to help you create a strategic approach to develop and fulfill the demand for your products and services. Business planning, marketing, organizational readiness, market research, and even purchasing assets necessary to fulfill contracts are all eligible expenses.

Social Delta is experienced, having worked with more than 400 social enterprises and social entrepreneurs across the country. We help with early stage creative thinking, professional market research, finding sources of start up funds, building effective and practical operational business plans, and scale social enterprises by increasing sales and reach.

We offer a complimentary 45 minute confidential consultation to discuss your business, and to listen to how we can help you create or grow a successful social enterprise. With the launch of the IRP, now there are funds available that can help us help you. To chat with us, book a free consultation online, or contact us here.

Six Steps to become a Knowledge Brokering Social Enterprise

October 7, 2019 / jonathanawade / Comments Off

Does your organization identify as one of the following?

A Centre of Excellence,
A knowledge hub,
A network of practice,
A think tank.

In today’s world, managing information is one of the biggest challenges. Great ideas, proven practices, academic research and innovative social ideas come from diverse sources. When good people have their heads down and are doing good work, silos naturally develop; sharing knowledge between the brains of the most progressive from all sectors has become a job in itself.

The problem is that nobody wants to pay for it.

Actually, that is not entirely true. Any rational person wants to see great ideas being shared. Groups like Ashoka, MaRS, or those offering collective workspace all know that when you mix ideas from different actors in different sectors you often get something new, and frequently something truly remarkable. Governments, large foundations and generous philanthropists in the last 15 years appear to like to invest in starting these “convening” activities and organizations.

However, if you are in the business of knowledge brokering, you are likely facing funding challenges after an initial 3-5 years in operation. (maybe 10 if you have a generous benefactor, or if you are housed at a university) There appears to be an expectation that once the infrastructure is built with the initial funding, then the knowledge sharing organization should have a sufficiently robust history, experience and brand to be able to generate revenues to sustain its staff and operations.

The problem is that financial sustainability is actually elusive.

Invariably, at the end of the funded start-up honeymoon is when I get a call. In the last two years or so, I’ve worked with several of these organizations. They each have exceptional staff committed to convening the best ideas and practices to address vital social issues: environment, child welfare, voluntarism, the threat of invasive species, human rights. Each has approached me wanting to sell their knowledge to those who need it most…the network of practitioners in their respective fields.

The problem is that practitioners can’t pay for it.

In each case, I’ve worked with my clients to document various options to generate revenues. There is an alarming pattern emerging, outlined in the following six mission-driven “opportunities” path:

Membership: We first investigate new (or audit existing) membership approaches, fees, and benefits. For those knowledge brokers who charge membership fees, most are struggling to maintain those programs in an era of the members’ limited resources and the organizations’ escalating costs. Actually, in every case I’ve scrutinized, once the cost of maintaining, renewing, servicing and recruiting members has been accurately accounted for, these program have generated negative financial returns, thus being a tax on the organization. Admittedly, membership programs offer other benefits—gravitas needed for advocacy, accountability, strategic planning direction, board membership, and often a constituency—but these benefits are “soft” and frequently only indirectly help the bottom line, if at all.
Conferences: The next revenue generating option suggested is invariably conferences and/or workshops. For organizations that have never run a conference, they are a lot of work, with very little financial reward. They typically rely on sponsorship to break even (ie fundraising work) and although they certainly support the knowledge brokering mission, they burn out staff, they take resources from other programming, and they can, in worst case scenarios, lose money. In fact, my observation in the last 10 years is that governments are not only providing less money for conferences as sponsors, but they are also sending fewer delegates to conferences as paying registrants. The conference business is slowly decaying except for private sector companies that use them to market new services and products.
Books and White Papers: Many knowledge broker organizations are either housed at universities, or at least affiliated with university programs. It is natural, then, to revert back to the possibility of producing books, articles, guides, handbooks, or white papers or some other form of printed materials. This effort is only a minor step in logic from the traditional form of knowledge sharing, but the increasing costs of research, production, and distribution are rarely covered by the price paid for these items. The smaller the publication, the cheaper it is to create and share, but the less anyone is willing to pay for it, especially if distribution is in a PDF format online. Oh, and printed documents (and even online documents for download) need to be continually updated, and this cost of “maintaining” the resource is difficult to recoup in the price the community will pay for it.
Training: the next logical step is to consider charging for training. Community based social change staff and volunteers who work daily to address social challenges can benefit from training on great techniques, tools and approaches. The knowledge broker organization—all that I’ve worked with—want to be able to give that information to everyone for free (to improve the social outcomes), but will reluctantly admit that they can’t give it away, they need to charge. A long discussion (and often primary research) ensues, only to discover that those who most want the training are the least able to pay for it. There is a last ditch effort to develop a prorated fee scale, hoping to use this technique of price discrimination to maintain accessibility for those who most need it. Financial viability is dicey with these sliding fee schedules, however.
Webinars: (actually, this is really idea 4b, but they are a different product from standard in-person training…). The logical argument made for webinars is that if the costs of training can be lowered, then the price can be low enough for practitioners to afford. The problem is that good online training actually costs a lot to produce, and in spite of its apparent easy of delivery, it is very hard to sell. A simple “shot on my cell phone” video may work for YouTube, but it is not sufficient for fee-based training products. Sound, lighting, script, and editing are all required to create training folks *might* pay for. There is an irony in our modern world; folks believe that if it is online information, it SHOULD be free. Indeed, there is a lot of free information on every subject out there, and practitioners often prefer to spend an hour (or five) using a search engine to find an array of non-curated content than to spend $100 on a hour of top notch content. This may be ironic, but it is also frustrating if you are trying to generate revenue.
Consulting: Inevitably, the discussion eventually evolves to consider bespoke consulting or a fee-for-service mentoring program. After all, knowledge broker organizations know things that other people don’t fully know, and that is a logical precondition for consulting or mentorship. After a raft of market research (both primary and secondary) for each of my past clients, in many cases it appears that there may be a “niche” non-profit consulting practice that might be of value. In most social issues there are individuals, corporations and governments who may need (read: are willing to pay for) curated information to make it possible for them to do their work. Short term consulting fees can make sense, especially if they remain relatively small contracts that might allow some purchasing autonomy for a branch office or a municipal bureaucrat.

After following this logical path, you may also consider the possibility of transforming your (currently funded) knowledge hub into a consulting business. However, be aware that consulting is a difficult way to make a living. Cash flow can be irregular, and balancing client timelines can be challenging. Many knowledge broker organizations realize that one way to minimize overhead costs is to create a roster of Associates; these Associates are experts, often drawn from the network of members or contributors, who can be called upon when needed, and then left off the payroll during slack consulting times.

If you are interested in learning more about how to structure a consulting social enterprise, please feel free to contact us for a free initial consultation.

Cultural Social Enterprises: Admission fees or “entrance by donation”?

August 15, 2019 / jonathanawade / Comments Off

Many social enterprises with cultural missions (museums, galleries, recreational facilities, or ongoing or travelling events) struggle with how to set admission prices, and many revert to a “jar at the door” asking for donations.

Spoiler alert: charge admission.

I firmly recommend to any social enterprise that they set prices (including admission fees) based upon a sound understanding of their cost structure, and how much they need to charge their guests they expect to visit their location to attempt to cover these costs. This recommendation is borne out of experience and logic for any business. For cultural social enterprises, they may not cover all of their costs, but charging an admission fee—over an admission-by-donation strategy—has many benefits described below:

Admission fees are professional

In 1st century BC, Publilius Syrus wrote: “Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it”. This is perhaps a bit simplistic, as the truth is that a sustainable price represents the point where both the customer and the business both are getting a good deal (or at least neither is getting a raw deal). Charging visitors for admission simply states to your customer that you have spent money to create an experience for them, and they need to spend money to enjoy the experience. All agree that good experiences cost money. Now there is nothing left to do other than haggle over price.

Free, however, suggest that the museum doesn’t pay for, or doesn’t care about, or perhaps doesn’t even know the costs of their service. The assumption by the consumer, paradoxically, is that the experience is likely not going to be very good. In the bizarre world of consumer expectations, free stuff is low quality and useless, and expensive stuff is better quality or valuable. (just think of drinking water or wrapping paper) Charging admission says that you are professional and that your business value proposition is important and valuable.

Admission fees do not decrease attendance

If you lose 5% of your customers due to the application of an admission fee, that would be a shame, but studies show that admission prices don’t actually decrease attendance. Some even argue that museums and cultural attractions actually get more customers by charging a “professional” amount (see above). A study in 2015 of 98000 adults in the US actually concluded that “in most instances, audiences indicate greater intentions to visit organizations that charge more than $20 for an adult admission than those that are free.”

The decision to visit a museum, gallery or event is affected by many factors and price plays a smaller role than most believe. Family history, geographic proximity (especially for travelers), hobbies and interests, marketing and promotions, available time, or availability of alternatives all play a pivotal role in attendance numbers for cultural social enterprises. After all, if you travel to Paris, do you really care what the price of admission is to the Louvre? You are already committed: once you’ve paid for the flight, hotel, meals, and your time…the admission could be 50 Euros before you would even blink.

Admission fees will generate more total revenue than donations

If 100 people come to your attraction and you charge them $10 to get in, you’ll earn $1000 in gross revenue. If 100 people come and are asked to make a suggested donation, you’ll be lucky to get $500 in revenue. It varies by event, attraction, demographics, region, and product, of course, but in every study I’ve read where a “suggested donation amount” is posted, the actual donation is 25-50 percent of the posted amount, even when the posted amount is significantly less than what the market would bear. This is lost revenue and lost opportunity for your cultural business.

There are tricks to try to increase donation amounts. Some have tried offering a choice of recommended amounts (and the results show that most people choose the median recommendation or less). Some have considered a sign saying that other patrons have historically given a certain amount (and this helps to bump up the average donation slightly).

One particularly creative example is from the The Contemporary Arts Museum of Houston (CAMH), which doesn’t charge admission and prefers to accept donations. They put out a donation box old-school style with a sign on it that reads: “Average cost per visit $22. Your admission charge $0. Suggested donation $5” This approach increased their average donation slightly, because it listed a factual cost (calculated from the previous year’s financials) as a benchmark allowing visitors to confer value upon the experience they are about to have. This is a clever approach, but still an approach that generated less revenue than a straight $10 admission fee.

Your gift shop benefits

Most cultural social enterprises have an opportunity for a secondary spend. What this means is that your visitors to the main attraction will (of course) be encouraged to visit the gift shop, the ice-cream stand, the café, or the special exhibit. It turns out that visitors who don’t pay for admission are also far less likely to spend money in other parts of your establishment. A good example comes from Cedar Rapids, which offers free admission for about two months a year to their Museum of Art. Their attendance during those promotions (contrary to most data) does increase, but as noted by the business owner “the average donation in the donation box remains in the range of 25-35 cents per person and the average amount spent by those who enter the gift shop plummets from about $13 to about $3.”

You can track and plan marketing and promotions

If your customers have to pay to get in, you can get more information from them that can help document your marketing success or guide your future promotions efforts. Where do they live? How many people are in their party? Did they question the price? Did they request a family rate? Did they use VISA, MC or AMEX? How did they hear about you? Did they use a coupon or a promotion through their hotel?

The act of collecting a fee allows for an interaction (either automatically by the point of sale software, or through conversation). Every time a business can interact with a client, it is an opportunity for improving customer service, retention, and renewal and another way to inform future marketing efforts. A donation box is normally anonymous (to protect the dignity of the donor), and thus represents a lost opportunity for business development.

Increased social outcomes

Although my data on length of visit of paying vs non-paying customers is largely apocryphal, visitors who have paid to get in to your exhibit are likely to “savour the experience” just a bit more, in order to get their money’s worth. In an art gallery this is often the experience for special exhibits; visitors will pay to see the Monet exhibit, for example, and even if their fee allows them free entrance to the regular collection, many will either forego the gallery’s resident collection, or they will rush through these works of art after hours of peering at the “valuable” art in the special exhibit.

Most cultural social enterprises want people to learn, enjoy, and engage in the mission of the business. Knowing that your customers will read every plaque, pause at every display, and ruminate on how this affects them is certainly a goal equal to or more valuable than the mere volume of visitors.

Admission fees force good business practices

It is true that if you charge a fee, your customers will expect more from your business. Many museums and cultural exhibits are struggling to maintain visitation levels in a world of virtual reality, internet museums, and so many fantastic blogs and websites devoted to capturing and curating history and culture. It is important for all cultural businesses to strive to find new ways to capture the attention of new audiences. Not only will admission fees generate revenue to help run the business, it will also force your board, staff, volunteers and content curators to work diligently to create excellent experiences for customers. There is little incentive to update, change, review, digitize or improve your collection or experience if the customer is not demanding it.

You can still be accessible

In my experience, the key rationale made to solicit voluntary contributions is to allow everyone to enjoy the museum, installation or activity. “Maximize accessibility” is the mantra. After all, if the mission of the business is to promote culture, then it may seem logical to not create any financial barrier to entry. For fully funded organizations, I accept that “admission by donation” will be fine, as the business costs will be covered by grants or sponsorships. However, the fully funded cultural social enterprise is a unicorn; people claim they exist, but I’ve never seen one.

It is possible to offer bursaries, school programming, or discounted days for those who are unable to pay. There are many creative examples of dignified programs and promotions that can help those for whom a small admission fee still is a concern.

Fees are guaranteed. Donations are fickle.

The other argument I often hear is that donations do not have a ceiling; that is to say, a donation request might yield a $1000 contribution, and surely that possibility makes an “entrance by donation” strategy worth considering. When faced with this assertion, I normally ask how many large gifts has the business ever received in this manner, and were they able to properly receipt, track and cultivate that donor? More often than not, there is no evidence that such a gift had ever been received, nor is it truly likely to be expected through that mechanism.

The truth is that even if there were to be a “huge gift” in the donation jar, perhaps once in a year, by fluke (every fundraiser knows that “people give to people,” after all), it is likely that the lost opportunity for all those who chose not to donate would exceed the value of the larger one-off gift.

To conclude, it is overwhelmingly clear to me that charging a fee is the right approach for all cultural social enterprises.

The downside risks (fear of decreased attendance or restrictions for those in poverty) are easily managed with creative pricing approaches if it is even necessary, while the benefits of an admission fee are significant. Under set admission fees, revenue is more stable, predictable and lucrative, and the organization is more professional and effective. Fees don’t need to be exorbitant, but they should at least reflect the costs of the business that have not been covered by donations, endowments, or sponsorships.

Regardless of the size of your business, charging an admission will help your social enterprise remain in business, impress and engage your customers, and most effectively promote your cultural or social mission.

The marketplace of social deficits

April 30, 2019 / jonathanawade / Comments Off

Most social enterprises start because an individual or an organization sees a problem in society—a social deficit—and they want to find a sustainable way to improve that deficit.

Just as inventions historically have helped to address perceived personal needs—from the radio to the steam iron—so too are innovations required to address social deficits, and if those innovations can be commercialized, then they are fodder for a strong social enterprise.

In the last few years, I’ve met an increasing number of people—both seasoned and young—who want to pursue social enterprise as a meaningful career path. However, many haven’t necessarily taken into account the marketplace of social deficits. In the last decade or more, there are some clear, growing areas of need in our society for which a social enterprise might be the right tool.

Below is my quick list of the challenges facing our society; this list describes a fertile field for social enterprise development to start.

Ageing populations will create needs for new financial tools, intergenerational wealth transfer, housing, urban design, mobility and new methods of countering isolation in a world of technology, fading social structures (like the church) and greater longevity.

A diversified global citizenry requires new approaches to schooling, language and cultural training, housing and ways to address conflict.

New health care needs for chronic illnesses and afflictions, including diabetes, arthritis, depression, obesity. Even some of those diseases which were considered acute (and typically life threatening) such as cancer and heart disease are increasingly being considered chronic, as survivors may require ongoing supports to live well.

Our energy needs are extraordinary. With a technologically advancing society, all our lives are affected by available electricity and locomotion. Our shelter, our food, our lifestyle, and even our money are all perilously threatened if we loose power, or if energy costs spurred by limited supply and increasing demand become unaffordable.

Water and other environmental challenges are also looming concerns of the next generation. Clean water is an ecosystem requirement and a threatened resource as the population grows, and as our continued polluting contaminates the limited freshwater reserves on the planet.

Increases in gambling, poor diets and inactivity, violence (gang, domestic, and other abuse), and the (mis)use of both illegal and prescription drugs are requiring us to reconsider the way the society must address social behavioral problems.

Crime appears to be on the increase, although statistics prove otherwise. Of course, we need not be complacent, as preventing crime is worth our vigilence at the local, national, international, and even the metaphysical space of the internet. Identity theft, concerns of privacy and even fears of falling victim to fraud pervade our news, and thus our response to the world around us.

The nature of work is changing and this creates many social challenges. Increased wealth is not translating in to increased welfare. Communal workplaces, telecommuting, and decreases in manufacturing and skilled labour are affecting our communities and exacerbating wealth gaps.

It also appears that the next generation is losing purpose, faith and hope in the structures of past generations (marriage, work, universities, religious institutions, government, etc).

Poverty and income inequality is also a global challenge. Our interdependent world means that poverty across the world will directly affect us all. Wars, famine, refugees, human rights abuses, and criminal activity are all reinforced by poverty, if not initiated by the curse of income inequality and injustice.

This list of social deficits should not drive us to despair. Statistically, global improvements to health, transportation, work, and international relations have enjoyed incredible gains over the last decades (“Factfullness” by Hans Rosling, will help reaffirm your faith in humanity).

Nevertheless, the traditional solutions to social deficits that have got us this far have often been direct interventions through the development of a new product or new service (or law!) by governments, non-profits, or private sector actors motivated by profits. However, the current multifaceted, systemic challenges are in need of more systemic solutions by engaging different sectors, different actors, new ideas, revised expectations, and new organizational structures.

Social enterprise is a tool—when done well—that can house systemic solutions that embody democratic (or collective) ownership, the focus of business thinking, the scale of the public sector and the compassion of the non profit and charitable world. By taking the best of all thinking, social enterprise is a vehicle to tackle both the new and intractable social deficits in our society.

Social entrepreneurs don’t just dabble in change.

March 18, 2019 / jonathanawade / Comments Off

For a good cause, wrongdoing is virtuous.
Publilius Syrus

I’m quite sure that this first century quote wasn’t about failing at a social enterprise, but it is worth taking the liberty now, in the 21^st century, of reinterpreting this quote to mean that doing something incorrectly in pursuit of a social benefit is still a virtuous pursuit.

Or is it?

Social enterprise employs a business model to create positive social outcomes. It requires selling goods and services in pursuit of a “good cause,” seeking to change the world for the better. In the current heady discourse surrounding social enterprise and social innovation I often hear the phrase “to fail forward” to highlight that social entrepreneurs and social change agents can learn from mistakes in their social businesses to improve the products, services or social outcomes they seek.

The problem is that social entrepreneurs are playing with live ammunition. If social entrepreneurs don’t succeed, in my experience they often give up and close their doors. When a social enterprise fails and closes, our society is left wounded. People are hurt. Jobs for underemployed are lost. Social outcomes are not improved.

In fact in just the last few years, I’ve witnessed dozens of ambitious, intelligent, and idealistic entrepreneurs from all sectors fail at creating a sustainable social enterprise. Their failures are not seen as opportunities for some form of renaissance or rebirth. In fact, many of them fail quietly, in relative shame, and the lessons they learned are rarely shared with others. The social entrepreneurs find a new passion, or they retire, or they get drawn out of the challenge of entrepreneurship into a salaried position.

Therefore, this blog post is a warning to all who seek to become social entrepreneurs.

If you’ve identified some form of social justice, and you want to change it, you simply can’t give up.

The problem will persist or worsen without you. If social enterprise is not the right tool, then find another hammer to make a difference.

Business is hard work. Social enterprise is even harder work, because social entrepreneurs need to find financial sustainability in a market economy that has, in many cases, created the injustice they are trying to fix. One can’t just dabble in social enterprise. The stakes are just too high.

Social entrepreneur must know that they are fighting against a behemoth, and it simply won’t be easy. They must commit to their work as a calling “for a good cause.” They must know that social enterprise is a responsibility and will likely be a hardship. If you choose this life, you are likely going to get roughed up a bit. Steel yourself for this fact.

Doing the right thing is never easy. Don’t be fooled into believing that social enterprise is easy. And when it gets hard to push onward, don’t allow yourself to give up. Our common good is at stake.

social delta