I recently read The Razor’s Edge by M. Somerset Maugham. I loved it. This book was written in the 1940s and touches on many themes that we deal with today in the 2010s — the life journey we embark on, the search for what we feel will fulfill us, our most pressing need — for some the answer is social status, others financial security, others self-destruction and for others simply happiness through finding peace.

We work within the human condition. Our basic instincts and desires while living in society do not change that much from generation to generation — how we express them certainly does and the tools and technologies we have available advance.

Last week, I had the opportunity to attend the social capital markets conference, SoCap 2010, in San Francisco, CA. Pretty exciting meeting — a lot of people really committed to putting their efforts behind projects/companies/organizations focused on helping humanity.

Part of me thinks there is some ego involved. Frankly, it feels good to help other people — so for overall quality of life, the social enterprise sector is a good thing to be a part of.

These videos from Panahpur, a UK organization with a history as a charitable trust now focusing on impact investing, describe well the holistic intention behind social capital — the pressing need for Generation Y to do good; yes as a backlash to the greed inherent yet socially supported by Generation X and the Baby Boomers. The pendulum is swinging.

I don’t know from Kevin Burgess on Vimeo.

The backers of Singularity University, some of the most influential technologists on the planet seem to think that yes, technology is a logical answer to solving the world’s problems.

Check out this recent exposition from the New York Times.

I argue that advances in technology + moral fortitude are the appropriate combination.

Ultimately, we are humans behind any technology. And, as humans we are  the beneficiaries, or not, of any technology.

I recently read this article too from the New York Times — over fifty years ago, the executives at Bell Telephone were concerned that their rising management who were mainly trained as engineers, didn’t have a broader world view to effectively manage people and steer the company. So, they partnered up with the University of Pennsylvania and started the Institute of Humanistic Studies for Executives. They felt: “A well-trained man knows how to answer questions, they reasoned; an educated man knows what questions are worth asking.”

The moral compass available to the human being is what makes us unique as a species — along with our ability to reason and our emotions.

Let’s make sure we continue to go after the right questions — in our quest for technological prowess.

Do we really need to live hundreds of years? Can we more adequately focus our attention and money on applying technology to support comprehensive moral programs that benefit broader humanity in the now?

This article was recently published on Social Edge, “It doesn’t take an MBA – or does it?“.

In the budding industry of social enterprise, I find an MBA immensely helpful. The combination of passion, commitment, and desire with strong management technique is essential. One without the other is inadequate, while together very powerful. In any MBA program, managing people, resources, and partners is openly discussed and studied. Every social enterprise must consider these topics.

Now you certainly don’t learn everything in an MBA program. Can leadership be taught? And I certainly did not learn much about sales, but I find myself selling/pitching everyday.

I find the skills for being a successful entrepreneur are akin to that of administering social change — innovation, leadership, risk-taking, the ability to “sell” — your vision to potential partners, funders, and employees.