Thank you for having uploaded the video. I would like to discuss further the first question from the audience ('if a general advice is to specialize and stick to you core businesses or your core business strengths, than how come BRAC has been succesful defying this principle by taking on a wide variety of activities?'): perhaps the following principle is true: the bigger the number of competitors, the bigger the need to specialize and focus on your biggest strengths. Since with most of the BRAC social enterprises it seems to have been the case that there were barely any competitors, it was less risky to go into those fields as a beginner. So this explains why it has been right for BRAC to take on a broad variety of services. Besides, it seems true for at least some of the social businesses (like poultry feed, and milk collection and pasteurization) that if there were sufficient competitors/providors, BRAC would not have gone into those fields to begin with, as it would have felt no need to build things which were not really needed. Perhaps an 'opposite' principle is true as well: 'if there are no competitors, than please go ahead and create/revitalize this whole industry (if it is relevant enough to your vision and mission), even if it is unfamiliar terrain for you'. (BRAC has created/revitalized multiple industries such as: poultry and silk) What do you think? PS: Catherine H. Lovell in her 1992 book on BRAC ('Breaking the cycle of poverty') has provided terms to describe the two approaches: a 'needs-led' approach decides its products/programmes based primarily on what is needed from customers/clients, while a 'methodology led' approach makes these decisions based on the organisations strengths and resources. Lovell calls BRAC's way of working 'needs-led'. (So a way to rephrase my discussion question with these terms is: should the decision to go for a ' needs-led approach' be based in the first place on the number of competitors providing the relevant needs?)
We love very much dear Abed bhi
I am very proud to be a citizen of same country where Sir Abed lives.
love u sir 🌹
My home in
Love you sir
Thank you for having uploaded the video.
I would like to discuss further the first question from the audience ('if a general advice is to specialize and stick to you core businesses or your core business strengths, than how come BRAC has been succesful defying this principle by taking on a wide variety of activities?'):
perhaps the following principle is true: the bigger the number of competitors, the bigger the need to specialize and focus on your biggest strengths. Since with most of the BRAC social enterprises it seems to have been the case that there were barely any competitors, it was less risky to go into those fields as a beginner. So this explains why it has been right for BRAC to take on a broad variety of services.
Besides, it seems true for at least some of the social businesses (like poultry feed, and milk collection and pasteurization) that if there were sufficient competitors/providors, BRAC would not have gone into those fields to begin with, as it would have felt no need to build things which were not really needed.
Perhaps an 'opposite' principle is true as well: 'if there are no competitors, than please go ahead and create/revitalize this whole industry (if it is relevant enough to your vision and mission), even if it is unfamiliar terrain for you'. (BRAC has created/revitalized multiple industries such as: poultry and silk)
What do you think?
PS: Catherine H. Lovell in her 1992 book on BRAC ('Breaking the cycle of poverty') has provided terms to describe the two approaches: a 'needs-led' approach decides its products/programmes based primarily on what is needed from customers/clients, while a 'methodology led' approach makes these decisions based on the organisations strengths and resources. Lovell calls BRAC's way of working 'needs-led'. (So a way to rephrase my discussion question with these terms is: should the decision to go for a ' needs-led approach' be based in the first place on the number of competitors providing the relevant needs?)
Rip Sir Fazle Hasan Abed!
Good