Growing The Maori Economic Engine

Collective Impact:
Growing The Māori Economic Engine
Report for Te Puni Kōkiri
Travis O’Keefe
Shay Wright
November 2013

KO WAI MĀTOU? WHO WE ARE
The Icehouse is about helping Kiwi businesses to grow.
The Icehouse was founded as a trust in 2001 by the University of Auckland Business School and
other corporate partners. The vision was to establish an organisation that was all about business
growth education for entrepreneurs, business owners and managers.
The Icehouse goal is to help support and enable 1,000 businesses in New Zealand to achieve
international opportunities and success. Our Māori unit is focused on helping enable the leaders of
150 Māori businesses to be internationally capable by 2020.
HE AHA Ā MĀTOU MAHI? WHAT WE DO
The Icehouse provides expertise, networks and funding to enable New Zealand business owners
to build capability and leadership and accelerate their business growth journey. We have worked
with over 4,000 business leaders, owner-managers and entrepreneurs, from start-ups to
established businesses to Māori trusts. The Icehouse is also New Zealand’s leading business
incubator.
The Icehouse has partners such as BNZ, HP, Microsoft, Telecom and NZ Trade & Enterprise.
Our Māori unit has the support of Deloitte, Te Puni Kōkiri, Te Tumu Paeroa and Waiariki Institute.
nztiok@gmail.coms.wright@theicehouse.co.nz

Tui, tui, tuituia tātou.
Whakarongo ake au ki te tangi a te manu nei a te tui, tui, tui, tuituia!
Tuia i runga, tuia i raro, tuia i roto, tuia i waho.
Tuia ki te here tangata i takea mai i Hawaiki nui, i Hawaiki roa, i Hawaiki
pāmamao.
I te hono i wairua, ki te whai ao, ki te ao mārama.
Join us so we can rejoice and unite.
I listen to the call of this bird the tui, calling, calling, let us be united!
Link us above, below, from the inside and the outside.
Link us to the human lineage origins of great Hawaiki, long Hawaiki, distant Hawaiki.
Where our souls rejoin, link us to from the beginning of time to now, to the world of light.
E tau ki runga i a tātou katoa te wairua o ngā mātua tūpuna. Nā ratou i
whakatakoto te ara hei hīkoinga mā tātou ngā uri; i whakatō ki ō tātou
ngākau ki ngā tikanga hei aratakingia i a tātou; kia ngākaunui ki te hāpai
i ā tātou mahi katoa i roto i te pono, i te tika, i te māramatanga; me te
aroha o tētahi ki tētahi.
Let the spirituality of our ancestors settle upon us. They were the ones who set down the path for us, the descendants,
to traverse. They also embedded customs in us that would guide, commit, and elevate all that we do in good faith,
righteousness, and understanding, with a love for each other.
Mā te whakapakari anō i te whakaaro me ngā pūkenga, me te mahi
ngātahi i roto i te ao hurihuri nei, tērā pea me whakatakoto ētahi rautaki
hou kia eke ai ngā rawa Māori me tātou te iwi Māori ki te taumata e tika
ana. Ki te whakapakari mātou i te hunga e whakahaere ana i o mātou
rawa, i o mātou kamupene he painga tēnā mō tātou, he painga anō tēnā
mō Aotearoa katoa.
By developing and strengthening ourselves, and working together in this ever-changing environment, we can potentially
put new strategies in place to better manage our resources, so that they, and our people, can reach their potential. So
if we contribute the strength of our Māori business leaders, that can only be beneficial to us as Māori and to the wider
New Zealand.

Authors of the Report
We thought it would be worthwhile outlining the process we took to get to the final report. Having read BERL
(Business and Economic Research Limited) research that outlined the potential growth in the Māori economy over
the next 50 years, we were aware of the potential for growth. We then scoped out what was being done to
achieve this growth goal. Despite many strategies in place to grow Māori enterprises, we found few practical and
innovative solutions that are actually successfully delivering this growth. What seems to be missing are practical
ways of taking the ideas and strategies that have been created and executing them. Te Puni Kōkiri agreed that it
would be useful to have an entrepreneurial perspective into how Government could most effectively support Māori
enterprises to grow, and so this report gives an indication into how that may occur.
Rather than coming up with another piece of research, we wanted to ensure that our report used existing BERL
research and set out an entrepreneurial method of execution that could be used to unlock the potential of the
Māori economy.
Research states that between 75 and 90 percent of start-up ideas fail, and 90 percent of strategies fail due to
execution. The method we researched and set out in this report helps overcome these challenges. To ensure a
more robust perspective, we sought the input and feedback of some of New Zealand’s top Māori entrepreneurs
and innovators. The following report is the summation of our thoughts.
Travis O’Keefe (Ngāti Porou)
Serial Māori entrepreneur and business coach. Travis has led the commercial growth of 10
businesses across a diverse range of industries including health, education, communications,
hospitality, technology, advertising, Māori and not-for-profit sectors. Travis is also a Māori
business coach with the Icehouse, working with iwi, entrepreneurs and Māori trusts. In 2009
Travis received the ‘Supreme award for Māori innovation and entrepreneurial achievement’.
Shay Wright (Te Rarawa, Ngāti Ruanui)
Shay is currently the Head of Māori Development at The Icehouse, combining entrepreneurship,
education, Māori development and community economics to develop growth pathways for Māori
business leaders and iwi managers. He is also a Board member of Teach First NZ, a leading
education initiative; and former Advisory Board member of the NZ-US Council and Callaghan
Innovation’s Māori Engagement Strategy Group.

Contributors to the Report
As part of this report, we sought feedback and critiques from a small group of Māori entrepreneurs and innovators
who understand the Māori dynamic and who think differently to the status quo. They are:
Toko Kapea (Ngāti Apa, Taranaki, Te Atihaunui-a-Papārangi)
Director of Tuia Group, which offers business consulting, commercial law and economic
development services. Board member of Paraninihi ki Waitotara Inc, Chair of Ngāti Apa
Developments Ltd and Director of Port Nicholson Fisheries Ltd.
Jacob Kajavala (Ngāi Tuhoe, Ngāti Ruapani)
Māori entrepreneur, owner-manager of Kajavala Forestry Ltd, and founder of Switch Kites,
which manufactures and sells kite surfing equipment globally. In 18 months, Switch Kites has
secured 3 percent of the world’s kite surfing market. Jacob is also president of the Forest
Industry Contractors Association.
Shelley Campbell (Ngā Puhi, Ngāti Maniapoto)
CEO of the Sir Peter Blake Trust. Board member of Te Pou, Le Va, Halberg Disability Sport
Foundation and Cancer Council NZ. In 2007 Shelley was the first Māori to receive a Sir Peter
Blake Leadership Award. Her previous role was CEO of Waikato Primary Health, which
provides health services to 315,000 people across the central North Island.
Potaua Biasiny-Tule (Ngāti Pikiao, Ngāti Whakaue, Tuhoe, Whānau-a-Apanui, Ngāti Kahungunu)
Founder of Māori online news site TangataWhenua.com. Innovator, academic and digital
entrepreneur. Member of the Te Arawa Standing Committee on the Rotorua District Council.
Previous roles as a lecturer at Waikato University, in Parliament, for the Waitangi Tribunal, and
as Project manager of Google Māori.
David Irving
Retired CEO of Heinz Watties Australasia. Chairman of Prolife Foods, AS Wilcox, AuCom
Technologies and Marstel Terminals Ltd. Co-Founder of The Icehouse in 2001, and former
Icehouse director, chairman and trustee. He has designed and developed content, presented
and mentored on hundreds of programmes for SMEs. For this effort, David was named a 2013
Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit for his services to business and education.
Grahame Christian (Ngāti Huarere, Ngāti Maru)
Managing Director and shareholder of SMART Environmental Ltd, New Zealand’s largest
privately owned waste minimisation and recycling business, active across New Zealand and
employing more than 250 people. Chair of Pare Hauraki Asset Holdings, assets held on behalf
of Hauraki iwi, and of New Chum. New Zealand touch player, coach and director for 20 years.
Ian Taylor (Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngā Puhi)
Ian is one of New Zealand’s leading Māori innovators and was named Aotearoa Māori Business
Leader of the Year 2013. Founder and owner of computer graphics company Animation
Research Limited (ARL) and multi-media company Taylormade Media. Former Board member
of Māori Television and Innovation Board of the Ministry of Science and Innovation. Inducted
into the New Zealand Hi-Tech Hall of Fame, Companion of the NZ Order of Merit in 2010 and
North & South magazine’s 2010 New Zealander of the Year.

Contributors to the Report
“I haven’t heard much about Collective Impact before and at first glance it seems like just another
version of collaboration with some new jargon and terms, like ‘lead agency’ becoming ‘backbone
organisation’. What grabbed my attention though was the point around this approach solving the
execution challenge associated with collaboration. This is where for Māori (and non-Māori) most of
the breakdowns occur. We are keen to collaborate at the idea stage, but when it comes to ‘making it
happen together’ most fall over.”
Shelley Campbell,
Ngā Puhi, Ngāti Maniapoto
(CEO of the Sir Peter Blake Trust; Sir Peter Blake Trust Leadership Award recipient)
“This report covered a lot of ground. When I first looked at it I wasn’t excited about the prospect of
reading 25 pages, but it was well communicated and refreshing to see such an actionable solution.
Ultimately I believe it comes down to Māori picking up the ball and running with it. Currently there is
a widespread lack of knowledge and confidence. This breeds fear, which manifests stagnation. The
Government can not change this for us, we have to do it; but having Government work alongside us
as a partner will help build the confidence in ourselves and skills where a knowledge vacuum
currently exists.
Having the sincere buy-in from adaptive leaders to the Collective Impact initiative will mean that
everyone feels supported, and issues that inevitably arise are dealt with swiftly, succinctly and
honestly. This allows momentum to be maintained. I also really like the concept of investing in
economic engines because it has such a strong return on investment.”
Jacob Kajavala,
Ngāi Tuhoe, Ngāti Ruapani
(Māori entrepreneur; Owner-manager of Kajavala Forestry Ltd; Founder of Switch Kites)
“This report makes so much sense. It is an obvious, yet ground-breaking report. As Māori we are
often flooded with opportunities but are in no position to take advantage of them. Even though we
seek the same results (iwi wealth, health and self sufficiency) we often are working against each
other. This report provides us with lots to consider.”
Potaua Biasiny-Tule
Ngāti Pikiao, Tuhoe, Te Whānau a Apanui, Ngāti Kahungunu
(Māori tech entrepreneur; Founder of TangataWhenua.com)
“I totally agree with the Collective Impact concept both at a local and national level, where appropriate. We
have built our business on a model of innovation, collaboration and co-operation, working with others
including some of our competitors.”
Grahame Christian
Ngāti Huarere, Ngāti Maru
(Managing Director and shareholder of SMART Environmental Ltd; Chair of Pare Hauraki Asset Holdings

BERL Report Summary Page 1
Background to Research Context Page 2
Summary of Proposed Solution Page 4
Part One: A Solution Page 5
Collective Impact and Growing Economic Engines Page 5
International Case Studies Page 6
The Five Conditions of Collective Impact Page 8
Achieving Shared Measurement Systems Page 9
Summary of Part One Page 10
Part Two: Growing Economic Engines Page 11
Examples of Funding Economic Engines Page 12
Summary of Part Two Page 13
Part Three: Bringing Collective Impact to Life Page 14
The Preconditions for Collective Impact Page 14
The Phases to Make Collective Impact Work Page 14
Keeping Collective Impact Alive Page 16
Summary of Part Three Page 18
Conclusive Comments Page 19
Recommended Next Steps Page 19
Appendix Page 20
Q1: Govt helping to improve the leadership of Māori enterprises Page 20
Q2: Govt developing the skills and capabilities of the labour force Page 23
Q3: Govt encouraging collaboration to improve Māori scale and capability Page 25
Q4: Govt genuine engagement with science and innovation sector and Māori Page 26
References Page 28
Contributors Notes - Ian Taylor Page 29
Contributors Notes - Grahame Christian Page 30
Contents Page

1
BERL Report Summary
In 2011 the Māori Economic Taskforce and Te Puni Kōkiri commissioned BERL (Business and Economic
Research Limited) to investigate the potential growth of the Māori economy during the period to 2061. The BERL
report titled ‘The Māori Economy, Science and Innovation’ models four potential scenarios. Within this, world
demand for New Zealand export products is projected to grow across a range of industries such as agriculture,
forestry, aquaculture, tourism, education and other services.
BERL’s modelling assumes innovation in the sales and marketing activities for new and existing products and
services of the Māori economy. The report findings suggest that by 2061 the Māori economy could grow by $12.3
billion and create an additional 149,600 job opportunities. The report also signifies the significant costs if a ‘do
nothing’ choice is made.
The goal of this report is to provide insights into new ways that Government could maximise its resources to solve
the many and complex challenges that we face in achieving the level of growth of the Māori economy forecasted
by BERL.
Given the number and size of the challenges, we have a view that the most pressing opportunity is to align current
organisations and service providers to help overcome these challenges. When we look at the spectrum of
services offered to the Māori economy that are supported by Government, some are effective, and many others
are ineffective but continue to receive Government support.
The BERL report highlights that for these returns to be realised, there are significant challenges that must be
overcome. Some of these challenges require legislative and attitudinal change, and some require more
effective management and funding of existing solutions. BERL prioritises four areas of focus:
 The challenges call for skilful leadership and a need to build further capability.
 The appropriate skills, education and training will better ensure that when opportunities arise,
people are able to take advantage of them.
 Enhancements in governance, management, communications and capabilities can also arise
through collaboration with exemplar enterprises in the Māori economy.
 A long-term investment and effort in developing skills and capabilities of the labour force.
 The development of long-term relationships and collaborative efforts to capture gains from capacity
and capability improvements, as well as from economies of scale.
 A genuine engagement between Māori enterprises and the science and innovation sector.
 This requires a long-term investment, effort and engagement with science and innovation.
 There is a disconnect between the science and innovation sector and the Māori economy. The
transfer of innovative and scientific knowledge from the knowledge producers to Māori enterprises
is weak, and a new focus is required to achieve a relationship that meets the needs of the Māori
economy.

Background to Research Context
Te Puni Kōkiri identified a need for innovative suggestions as to how the Government could most effectively
support Māori enterprises to realise the growth potential outlined by BERL. Icehouse was commissioned to
provide a ‘thought leadership’ report that draws on the insights of entrepreneurs who are likely to have a different
way of looking at the issues faced.
Māori are described as highly enterprising, resourceful and entrepreneurial (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor,
2006). Māori business people and entrepreneurs often have great ideas and the drive to turn them into
reality. They have the potential to make a difference. We define entrepreneurs as the people who can combine
fresh thinking with hard work to create positive social change. They bring new solutions and products to market,
and create jobs and wealth. They overcome barriers in developing businesses, and have lessons and
experiences that are relevant to Government in assisting with solving social and business challenges. The voice
of entrepreneurs deserves a presence in ‘thought leadership’ where practical solutions are sought. In this report
we will include the feedback of a number of well-regarded Māori entrepreneurs.
This report aims to provide a new way of looking at the challenges facing Māori enterprises and how Government
could most effectively assist in solving them. Without properly understanding the challenges that Māori
enterprises are grappling with in unlocking their economic potential, just assessing solutions would miss the critical
first step. This report is informed by dozens of literature reviews into the challenges of Māori enterprises, and by a
twelve month research project conducted by The Icehouse into business growth challenges facing Māori SME
businesses, iwi runanga, trusts and incorporations. It also draws on the insights of consultants, professionals and
service providers to Māori enterprises in education, health, business and infrastructure.
You will find this report interesting if you are looking at a new approach to supporting Māori enterprises, or if you
are aiming to achieve effective collaboration between a group of service providers that together could solve a
societal problem.
There is an abundance of research and academic review of the barriers and problems in growing Māori
businesses. This is of some value in understanding the landscape, however there appears to be limited captured
knowledge directly from the market, and few practical and effective solutions to overcoming these challenges.
The challenges often require responses that utilise skills from a range of disciplines.
In this report we will consider the challenges presented by BERL. We have distilled these into the four following
questions, and have conducted research and analysis into solving these four questions:
2
1) How could the Government help improve the leadership (Governance and Management) of Māori
enterprises?
2) How could the Government invest in developing the skills and capabilities of our labour force to unlock
the potential of Māori enterprises?
3) How could the Government encourage organisations to collaborate efforts to improve Māori enterprises
scale (capacity) and capability?
4) How could the Government get genuine engagement between Māori enterprises and the science and
innovation sector?

Background to Research Context
Bearing in mind the complexity with addressing each of the questions posed, it is unlikely that any one initiative or
service provider could solve all of the challenges. Each question has multiple aspects that need to be addressed.
For example, in answering question 3 about Māori enterprises collaborating to achieve scale, one of the main
challenges to achieving this is the politics of individuals in Māori organisation leadership roles not trusting one
another or not wanting to share returns from a collaborative arrangement.
In addressing question 4 about engagement with the science and innovation sector, we could have looked at
many different issues, such as how Government funding is allocated, the measurements of success that are
required to improve innovation in Māori businesses, or the political value for Government of funding research
institutions because of public perception.
To pick up on the first issue, Māori enterprises generally require research and innovation to help them determine
how they can improve their financial or environmental performance. This often requires market-led innovation and
commercialisation rather than scientist-led research. The challenge for Government is that currently research and
development funding is heavily skewed towards academic and research institutions. There are high political
consequences to Government in redirecting some of this funding from academic research towards business-led
innovation because it would impact on post-graduate education funding opportunities. For this reason, although
necessary to consider, it is risky for Government to do so.
If we were to construct this entire report with a deep analysis of each issue, it would require an overview of
multiple solutions and programmes relating to all problems within each question. It would be a tedious process
and produce limited value to Te Puni Kōkiri in terms of understanding simple solutions that may have the most
impact in solving these challenges.
3

Summary of Proposed Solution
In shaping up this report, David Irving, former Chief Executive of Heinz Watties and co-founder of The Icehouse,
reinforced that each question posed was complex and so it was important to isolate the role that Government
should play that would create the most value for their investment. In analysing the most relevant part for
Government to solve, we concluded that it is not feasible for Government to directly address all challenges
outlined within the four questions. It would be more efficient and effective for Government to instead facilitate and
motivate other organisations to solve these challenges.
In light of this, we have provided summary responses to all four questions in the Appendix. Ultimately however,
the complexity of challenges presented in the BERL report defies the idea that any single programme or
organisation could deliver overall success. For this reason, we will focus this report on one practical solution that
can be applied across the four questions, as well as across multiple social challenges. In doing this, we will not
drill into detailed information because this is framed as a high level ‘thought leadership’ paper. There is a whole
body of evidence, further information and case studies that back up our recommendation, including examples of
where Government and non-Governmental entities are putting the suggested model into practice.
What is the one process that could assist the most?
‘Collective Impact’ is about getting a group of stakeholders across sectors to work together to achieve a common
outcome. It sets out a process for managing, measuring and ensuring commitment to a common agenda that will
solve a societal problem. Compared to other initiatives, Collective Impact requires a comparatively low level of
investment, carries a low risk of failure, and can have wide and scalable impact, maximising the value of
Government’s investment.
By utilising the Collective Impact process, Government does not have to directly solve the challenges identified by
BERL. Instead their role is to influence and enable organisations that already solve aspects of the complex
challenges to be more productive at doing so, and align their efforts to ensure impact is not isolated. In this way,
each participating service provider forms part of the solution.
Is this just another name for collaboration? Isn’t collaboration already happening?
More and more people are realising that Collective Impact is not just a fancy name for collaboration. It represents
a fundamentally different, more disciplined and higher performing approach to achieving large-scale social impact.
Many organisations attempt to collaborate, with varying degrees of effectiveness. It is not often that they begin
their relationship with a shared definition and understanding of the key problem that they are collaborating to
solve. Collective Impact initiatives have a structured methodology and process to ensure proper execution, which
is where many collaborations fail. Collective Impact therefore solves the execution challenge associated with
collaboration, and is shown to be effective on a small scale (CHF, page 9), on a regional scale (Strive, page 6), at
a national level, and at a global level (GAIN, page 6).
A vital part of making Collective Impact work is investing in the economic engines of the partner organisations.
This is the key lever to get everyone on board and buying into the goals and shared measurements, and also
helps with ensuring that the initiative partners are financially sustainable. The backbone organisation has an
important role in facilitating the Collective Impact partners’ activity, as well as helping grow their economic
engines.
With Government’s support and resourcing, Collective Impact presents a strong case for solving the challenges
that we are all trying to help solve with Māori enterprises.
4

Collective Impact and Growing Economic Engines
There are many organisations currently providing individual and isolated solutions to the problems outlined by
BERL. These have varying degrees of success. The lack of coordination and unified action means that their
impact at best achieves incremental improvement. Also, because there is no clear focus on the relevance or need
for any one initiative in the scheme of things, and each organisation is typically fighting for resources to deliver its
solutions, there is no guaranteed sustainability.
Many of the challenges raised by BERL could be solved by organisations and initiatives that already exist across
Aotearoa. For the Collective Impact model to work, we therefore need to identify and work with organisations that
have breakthrough and proven solutions. We then need to direct available funding not towards these
organisations’ services or programmes, but towards their revenue generating activities. By improving their
revenue position, these organisations are then able to focus their effort into scaling their impact and better solving
the challenges.
5
PART ONE: A Solution
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s
the only thing that ever does.”
Rahera Ohia
Ngāti Pukenga
(Ngāti Pūkenga iwi leader, Unlimited Magazine’s Top 25 Influencers in New Zealand for Innovation 2012)
Summary: Why Collective Impact as a Solution
 It brings together cross-sector expertise to create shared, clear and measurable goals and outcomes.
 It unites the best solutions across business, government and community to solve complex problems.
 It has been proven to work internationally, nationally and regionally.
 It can be tailored to meet the very specific and unique needs of Māori enterprises.
 It focuses on growing the ‘economic engines’ of member organisations, enabling them to scale their
individual programmes and services.
 Government has the power to enable impact of this scale by using its funding and influence.
Which parties could have a role in the Collective Impact initiatives?
 Iwi entities - on behalf of their iwi members
 Central Government - acknowledging their role in economic and social development initiatives
 Local and Regional Government - regarding their influence around local policy and resources
 Philanthropic organisations - with an interest in improving the outcomes for Māori people
 Māori enterprises - who are interesting in growing, or supporting growth of others in their region
 Service providers - who have the expertise and resources to contribute to initiative solutions

International Case Studies
If put into practice, Collective Impact could result in a partnership programme that has a broad impact on Māori
enterprise and entrepreneurship. Let us examine situations where Collective Impact has been effective in other
programmes that solve key social challenges:
6
Case Study 1: Strive - Cincinnati
An example of Collective Impact in action is ‘Strive’ in Cincinnati. ‘Strive’ brought together a core group of
more than 300 leaders from local organisations to tackle the student achievement crisis and improve
education in the Cincinnati region. In just four years and despite a recession and budget cuts, ‘Strive’
partners have improved student success in 34 of 53 success indicators measured, including high school
graduation rates, fourth-grade reading, math scores and preschool engagement.
The ‘Strive’ organisations include heads of private and corporate business, government, schools,
universities and colleges, education-related non-profit and advocacy groups all working collaboratively
using the process of Collective Impact. It did this by focusing the entire educational community on a single
set of goals, measured in the same way.
Consistent communication, developing shared performance indicators, discussing progress, and most
importantly, learning from each other and aligning their efforts to support each others’ initiatives was the
key to its success.
Case Study 2: Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN)
A global example of Collective Impact is the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN). GAIN has
helped reduce nutritional deficiencies among 530 million poor people across the globe. GAIN was created
in 2002 at a special session of the United Nations General Assembly. It has the goal of reducing
malnutrition in the developing world by improving the health and nutrition of nearly one billion ‘at risk’
people.
The development of GAIN was predicated on two assumptions: First, that there were proven interventions
that could be employed at scale to improve the nutrition of the poor in developing countries; and second,
that the private sector had a much greater role to play in improving nutrition, even for the very poor. In less
than a decade, GAIN has created and coordinated the activity of 36 large-scale collaborations, including
governments, NGOs, multilateral organisations, universities and more than 600 companies in 30 countries.
GAIN’s work has enabled more than 530 million people worldwide to obtain nutritionally enhanced food
and significantly reduced the prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies in a number of countries. In China,
South Africa, and Kenya for example, micronutrient deficiencies have dropped between 11 and 30 percent
among those who consumed GAIN’s fortified products. During its time, GAIN has also raised $322 million
in new financial commitments from its partners and leveraged many times more from its private sector and
government partners.

The complexity of solving the challenges presented and highlighted by the BERL report defies the idea that any
single programme or organisation could deliver overall success. The graph below, titled “Isolated Impact vs.
Collective Impact”, demonstrates that when well managed and funded, Collective Impact can pull together multiple
initiatives and service providers to create lasting, large-scale change.
7
Isolated Impact Collective Impact
Isolated Impact vs Collective Impact
 Funders select individual grantees that offer
the most promising solutions
 Non-profits work separately and compete to
produce the greatest independent impact
 Evaluation attempts to isolate a particular
organisation’s impact
 Large scale change is assumed to depend on
scaling a single organisation
 Corporate and government sectors are often
disconnected from the efforts of foundations
and non-profits
 Funders and implementers understand that
social problems, and their solutions, arise
from the interaction of many organisations
from within a larger system
 Progress depends on working toward the
same goal and measuring the same things
 Large scale impact depends on increasing
cross-sector alignment and learning among
many organisations
 Corporate and government sectors are
essential partners
 Organisations actively coordinate their action
and share lessons learned

8
The Five Conditions of Collective Impact
Research shows that successful Collective Impact initiatives typically have five conditions that together produce
true alignment between the partner organisations and lead to powerful results. These five conditions are a
Common Agenda, Shared Measurement Systems, Mutually Reinforcing Activities, Continuous Communication
and a Backbone Support Organisation. Each of the conditions are explained below in more detail.
Often when multiple stakeholder organisations are brought together for a project,
the work is additional to their core work programme and is not given priority. To
ensure that the Collective Impact initiative is given priority, there must be a
meaningful purpose and stakeholder input into defining the problem. All
participants must have a shared vision for change, build a common understanding
of the problem and utilise a joint approach to solving it.
Large scale challenges inevitably have multiple contributing causes and
components to their solutions, all of which are interdependent. With this
landscape, it is very difficult to address these problems when there exist a number
of uncoordinated actions among isolated organisations.
Developing communication must happen continuously on and off-line, so that
there is learning and solving problems together and knowledge-sharing. This also
involves continuously adapting to changing conditions and needs in order to
deliver the target Return on Investment (ROI).
Backbone
Support
Organisation
Creating and managing Collective Impact requires one organisation to serve as
the backbone for the entire initiative. This separate organisation and their staff
must embody the principles of adaptive leadership (see page 16) and have a very
specific set of skills. Their four main tasks are to:
a) Focus peoples’ attention and create a sense of urgency
b) Apply pressure to stakeholders without overwhelming them
c) Use their competence to frame issues in a way that presents opportunities
d) Mediate conflict that arises among stakeholders
Common
Agenda
Shared
Measurement
Systems
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
Continuous
Communication
The use of a common set of agreed measures and reporting used by all partner
organisations to monitor performance, track progress towards goals, and learn
what is or is not working. Utilising web-enabled data collection and consistently
measuring results from a list of indicators ensures efforts remain aligned and
enables accountability and on-going learning.

Achieving Shared Measurement Systems
9
Practitioners consistently report that achieving Shared Measurement Systems across the partner organisations is
one of the most challenging aspects to Collective Impact. The traditional paradigm of evaluating a single
organisation focuses on their isolated impact only. This is not easily transposed to measure the impact of multiple
organisations working together in real time to solve a common problem. Mutually reinforcing activities become
very clear once the work of many different organisations can be mapped out against the same set of indicators
and outcomes.
The use of a common set of agreed measures and reporting used by all partner
organisations to monitor performance, track progress towards goals, and learn
what is or is not working. Utilising web-enabled data collection and consistently
measuring results from a list of indicators ensures efforts remain aligned and
enables accountability and on-going learning.
Shared
Measurement
Systems
Use of Shared Measurement Systems: Calgary Homeless Foundation (CHF)
A Collective Impact effort was used to reduce homelessness in Calgary, Canada, supported by the
Calgary Homeless Foundation (CHF). When stakeholders first came together to define common
measures of homelessness, they were shocked to discover that the many agencies, providers, and
funders in Calgary were using thousands of separate measures relating to homelessness. They also found
that providers had very different definitions of key terms, such as the “chronic” versus “transitional”
homeless, and that their services were not always aligned to the needs of the individuals served. Merely
developing a limited set of eight common measures with clear definitions led to improved services and
increased coordination. Even privacy issues, a major legal obstacle to sharing data, were resolved in
ways that permitted sharing while actually increasing confidentiality.
In this respect, putting in place a shared measurement framework will set in motion a systems change to
get alignment across the whole system. To develop the shared measurement system there needs to be
broad engagement by many organisations in the field, as well as clear expectations about confidentiality
and transparency. The Calgary homelessness initiative had a cross-sector advisory committee and a
service provider committee involved in developing common measures from evidence-based research.
These measures were then refined through iterative meetings with dozens of stakeholders before being
finalised. This shows the significant investment required into achieving shared measurement systems to
make the Collective Impact model work.
Once shared measurement exists, participants must gather regularly to share results, learn from each other, and
refine their individual and collective work based on their learning. This may involve a Partnership Council, as in
the case of GAIN, which comprises experts in the relevant fields who advise the board of directors on the learning
agenda, reviews the data to ensure its integrity, and recommends programmatic and management improvements.
The backbone organisation supports the process of learning and improving throughout the life of the collaborative.

Summary of Part One
10
BERL outlined many challenges that need to be solved with Māori enterprises. We are able to utilise current
organisations and initiatives that already exist as part of the solutions, however there is a need for these
organisations to work together. Collective Impact is a proven way of bringing together multiple organisations to
solve complex problems. It has been used for initiatives across a wide range of problems, particularly social
problems, in many different countries and at different scales.
‘Strive’ in Cincinnati used Collective Impact to improve education in the Cincinnati region; and GAIN implemented
Collective Impact initiatives across 30 countries to reduce nutritional deficiencies among 530 million poor people.
When we compare the isolated impact model of an organisation with the model of Collective Impact, it is clear to
see how and why the results are so much stronger for Collective Impact. This is essentially because of the
alignment and robustness of partners, and the constant learning and sharing of information across the partner
network.
There are five necessary conditions to ensuring successful Collective Impact initiatives. These are important to
producing true alignment between the partner organisations. One of the most challenging of these conditions is
achieving shared measurement systems between partner organisations because each tends to have their own
definition of the problem, of success, and of the way that measurement should be carried out. Constantly sharing
the results of these measurements builds stronger collective traction towards the goals of the initiative.
To motivate involvement from a somewhat fragmented group of organisations, having shared ownership of the
problem, regular communication and shared measurement systems sets up a particularly strong set of
collaborative values. To further incentivise organisations to remain involved, resources are directed towards
helping grow the economic engines of the partner organisations involved in the Collective Impact initiative (further
explained on page 11).

11
An economic engine is simply the way in which an organisation most effectively generates its revenue and profits.
From an operational perspective, an economic engine is the key ratio that an organisation could focus on that will
have the most impact on their sustainable growth. This will vary from industry to industry and from company to
company. Once this is determined, an organisation’s efforts should be focused on continually improving this ratio
(Jim Collins, Good to Great).
Economic Engines and Collective Impact
An important role of the backbone organisation is working with the organisations involved in the Collective Impact
initiative to help grow their economic engines. This will often mean increasing the financial resources available to
the company to scale its impact. It is also important to invest in developing expertise within the partner
organisations so that each partner will be better able to improve their financial sustainability. Because this service
is available only to Collective Impact partners, this provides a strong incentive for these organisations to evolve
their offerings to fit into the Collective Impact framework.
Why Grow Economic Engines?
 Funding the economic engine of a certain service provider that solves a defined problem means the
amount of money flowing to that organisation is dramatically increased, and they can then use this to
resource up and scale their programmes.
 Doing this will attract organisations into Collective Impact.
 Ultimately it enables organisations to scale their impact.
 It has been proven to work internationally and in New Zealand (see examples on page 12)
What is the Role of Government in Growing Economic Engines?
Government is a key stakeholder in any Collective Impact initiative that is aimed at realising the potential of the
Māori economy. There are four reasons for this:
 Getting stakeholder buy-in is often most effective through a public-private partnership. This could involve
philanthropic and private organisations investing alongside Government to grow economic engines.
 Government has a Business Growth Agenda and funds a number of work streams that enable this. The Māori
economy offers huge potential growth, however current work streams only deliver incremental gains. There
remains a strong case for Government to consider redirecting some of that funding into initiatives that delivers
the outcome and growth being sought.
 Given the context of the BERL challenge, this solution would grow the export earnings for New Zealand.
 There is strategic value for Government aligning the various fragmented initiatives. This is far more likely to
achieve their export goals, and would mean a more strategic and coordinated use of Government funding.
 If Government were to change their funding model from directly funding initiatives to instead assisting an
organisation to improve its economic engine, this achieves a far greater leverage point and effective use of
resources. A multiplier effect often results, generates larger revenues for the organisation, which allows them
to focus their effort on increasing their scale of impact. In this sense, funding Collective Impact initiatives in the
beginning will mean that eventually there is a reduction in the amount of funding required as partner
organisations strengthen their economic engines and improve their sustainability.
PARTTWO: Growing Economic Engines
“If you want to maximise the social impact of your funding, why would you buy, for example, $100,000
worth of great educational programmes for Māori leadership when the same $100,000 directed
towards that organisation’s revenue generation could help them generate $1 million to put into
funding those programmes?”
Travis O’Keefe, Ngāti Porou
(Social Entrepreneur; Supreme Winner of the 2009 Māori Innovation Icon & Entrepreneurial Award)

Examples of Funding Economic Engines
There is nothing radical about the concept of funding an organisation’s economic engine so that they can scale
their initiative. This has become an established way of operating, and there are many examples where this
approach has been successful, internationally and within the Māori economy.
Māori Case Study 1: MaiFM 88
In the early 1990’s, Te Runanga o Ngāti Whatua secured a FM radio license but would have to rely on
Government funding to deliver the MaiFM radio programme. Ngāti Whatua instead decided to move from
funding radio programmes to growing their economic engine. The aim was to create robust revenue
streams to fund the programmes on MaiFM.
Management decided to seek one-off funding and use it to develop, train and resource a sales team that
could sell advertising in the marketplace, and raise even greater revenues for the company. This proved
successful and MaiFM secured retail and national advertising spending from individual businesses and
media-buying agencies. Ngāti Whatua were then able to compete as an overtly Māori enterprise in our
most competitive radio market, and MaiFM became one of our most successful commercial broadcasters.
Result: By funding their economic engine instead of seeking grants to fund their programme delivery,
MaiFM became profitable, self-sustaining, and the number one music station in our toughest market.
MaiFM was then able to participate in the skills development industry, training hundreds of Māori into
careers in commercial media - an area Māori have traditionally been significantly under-represented in.
International Case Study 1: AIDS Rides
In 1993, the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Centre put up $50,000 to test the idea of the ‘AIDS Rides’, which were
community bicycle rides that raised money for AIDS services and medical research. The $50,000 was
used to fund pitches to corporate sponsors, which secured another $120,000. The organised cycling
campaign and event netted $1 million in its first year, which was a return of 20 times the original
investment. Over the course of the next eight years, ‘California AIDS Ride’ netted $20 million for the L.A.
Gay & Lesbian Centre (a return of 412 times the risk capital), and the Rides have raised more than $200
million for AIDS research. This is not bad from an initial $50,000 proof-of-concept investment.
12
International Case Study 2: Grameen Bank Micro-loans
In the early 1980’s, it was common for corporations to donate directly to entrepreneurs in developing
countries. This had no multiplier effect. The revolutionary movement of micro-financing began when Ford
Foundation provided a $800,000 bank guarantee to Muhammad Yunus’s social venture, Grameen Bank.
This was used as security to allow Grameen Bank to get risk-averse commercial banks to fund his
economic engine. With this money, Yunus has since provided billions of dollars worth of micro-loans to
unemployed people in Bangladesh and created opportunities for them to become self-employed. This
represents a huge multiplier effect.
Why Invest in more than one Organisation’s Economic Engine?
Investing into growing multiple organisations’ economic engines is important to the success of the initiative
because it motivates each partner organisation to bring their resources to bear. This assumes that the challenge
that is being addressed is multi-faceted and requires multiple organisations to each solve aspects of it.

Summary of Part Two
An economic engine is the way that an organisation most effectively generates its revenue and profits. Collective
Impact initiatives focus on growing the economic engines of the partner organisations who are part of the initiative.
This is a vital incentive to motivate these organisations to contribute their resources and effort to the Collective
Impact initiative. Growing economic engines through funding revenue generation or building capability will provide
organisations with greater resources to scale the positive work that they do. This activity is one of the critical
services offered by the backbone organisation to accelerate success.
Government plays an important role as part of a public-private partnership model alongside philanthropic and
private organisations. The main reasons for this are that Government currently funds multiple, uncoordinated
work streams to deliver their Business Growth Agenda, and a Collective Impact initiative would align this funding
to ensure a more strategic approach.
An example of achieving leverage is if a certain organisation needs to build capacity in technology and human
resources, Government could help fund this outcome directly, or could fund that company’s fundraising/revenue
generation activities. The latter would enable the organisation to raise the money itself to buy the resources. This
approach could mean that even more money is raised than is needed to purchase the resources, and it builds
revenue generating skills within the organisation. Both of these outcomes indicate a multiplier effect, allowing for
scalable impact. If Government funded the organisations work stream itself, the donation has zero multiplier effect
An immediate action that Government could take is broadening their funding criteria to allow organisations with
proven services to obtain funding towards growing their economic engines. The result of this, if successful, is a
multiplier effect on Government’s money invested because once the economic engine is successful, these
organisations can then independently fund the future delivery of their programmes.
There are many examples throughout the world, and even in New Zealand, of where this has been proven to work
and deliver a substantial multiplier effect on the initial investment.
13
“I like the concept of investing in economic engines, particularly those that can drive employment and
create high value jobs for our young people. It is essential that the growing $37 billion Māori
economy recognises the need to expand outside of the primary and service industries and into
high-value, globally focussed knowledge industries that are the future for both our people and our
country. We shouldn’t wait for the Government to lead the way here. We need to see Māori
organisation investing in economic engines of proven, successful businesses, Māori and non-Māori,
to enable them to grow.”
Ian Taylor
Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngā Puhi
(Founder of Animation Research Ltd & Taylormade Media; Māori Business Leader of the Year 2013)
“I agree that funding should be directed towards economic engines to provide capital to bring
together the parties and fund their growth. A derivative of this will be increased revenues as well as
new revenues, profits and jobs. This creates the multiplier effect. Education must flow from this
investment also.”
Grahame Christian
Ngāti Huarere, Ngāti Maru
(Managing Director and shareholder of SMART Environmental Ltd; Chair of Pare Hauraki Asset Holdings)
.

PARTTHREE: Bringing Collective Impact to Life
The Preconditions for Collective Impact
In order for Collective Impact to work, the most critical two preconditions are having Influential Champions and
Initial Funding.
1) Influential Champions
This is a small group of influential people who command the respect necessary to bring together CEO
level cross-sector leaders and keep them engaged. Research into Collective Impact confirms that these
champions provide the overall strategic direction for the initiative, facilitate dialogue, learning and
communication between partners and coordinate the community outreach. Mechanisms are required to
free up these champions to commit time to the initiative, and forums need to be established so they can
get together to discuss and generate opportunities. Knowing that there will be an investment into growing
their organisation’s economic engine will motivate them to be involved. Failure to do these three things
may prevent the initiative from getting past concept stage.
2) Initial funding
There must be sufficient financial resources to coordinate the project for two to three years during Phase
1 and Phase 2. Ideally this is sourced from one anchor funder who is engaged from the beginning and
who can provide the core infrastructure and planning processes. In the GAIN example (page 6), The
Gates Foundation, Canadian International Development Agency, and USAID provided the initial funding
to set up the initiative.
14
The Phases to Make Collective Impact Work
Once the preconditions are in place, our research suggests that there are three distinct phases for
a Collective Impact project.
 Requires an understanding of the landscape of key players and the existing
work that each is currently undertaking.
 Baseline data on the challenge that is to be overcome to develop the case for
change.
 Initial governance structure that includes strong and credible champions.
 Requires that stakeholders work together to establish common goals and
shared measures.
 Create a supporting backbone infrastructure.
 Begin the process of aligning the many organisations involved against the
shared goals and measures.
 Requires that stakeholders pursue prioritised areas for action in a coordinated
way.
 Systematically collect data.
 Ensure a culture of learning with sustainable processes that enable course
correcting as they track progress toward their common goals (see graph titled
“Phases of Collective Impact" on page 15).
Phase 1:
Initiate Action
Phase 2:
Organise for
Impact
Phase 3:
Sustain Action
and Impact

Collective Impact builds on current solutions by honouring the efforts and contributions of service providers and
engaging them to work together. It is important to create an effective infrastructure that enables diverse
stakeholders to work together to fix a broken system. This takes time, and the first two phases of Collective Action
may take between six months and two years. A readiness assessment based on the preconditions on the
previous page will help define the time required.
15
Components for
Success
PHASE 1 -
Initiate Action
PHASE 2 -
Organise for Impact
PHASE 3 -
Sustain Action
and Impact
Phases of Collective Impact
Governance and
Infrastructure
Strategic Planning
Community
Involvement
Evaluation and
Improvement
Identify champions and
form cross-sector groups
Map the landscape and
use data to make case
Facilitate community
outreach
Analyse baseline data to
identify key issues and
gaps
Create infrastructure
(backbone and
processes)
Create common agenda
(goals and strategy)
Engage community and
build public will
Facilitate and refine
Support implementation
(alignment to goals and
strategies)
Continue engagement
and conduct advocacy
Collect, track, and report
progress (process to
learn and improve)
Establish shared metrics
(indicators, measurement,
and approach)

Keeping Collective Impact Alive
Two key structural elements enable Collective Impact initiatives to succeed and remain sustainable:
 A backbone organisation
 Cascading levels of linked collaboration
A) The Backbone Organisation
This serves six essential functions:
 Providing overall strategic direction
 Facilitating dialogue between partners
 Managing data collection and analysis
 Handling communications
 Coordinating community outreach
 Mobilising funding
The best structure is situation-specific because several factors impact on the project, namely:
i. The issue and geography
ii. The ability to secure funding
iii. A perceived neutrality of the organisation
iv. The ability to mobilise stakeholders
It is important that the backbone organisation is not hindered by regulations and policies imposed by Local
Government or Government. The backbone needs to have a clear mandate and freedom to do whatever it
takes to ensure the initiative can be carried out.
Principles of Adaptive Leadership
No Collective Impact effort can survive unless the backbone organisation is led with strong adaptive
leadership skills. These are what set great leaders apart from others in leadership positions. It is a
combination of skills, perspective and effort that allows leaders to mobilise people without imposing a
predetermined agenda, earn respect and act transparently, and not taking credit for the success of the
initiative but instead leave success to the participating organisations. The backbone organisation maintains
a balance between the leadership needed to keep all parties together and letting stakeholders own the
success.
Sufficient resources
Backbone organisations must also be sufficiently well resourced. A backbone’s funding is typically less
than one percent of the total budgets of the organisations that it coordinates and it can dramatically
increase the effectiveness of the other 99 percent of expenditures, or attract new funds to support the
initiative.
16

B) Cascading Levels of Linked Collaboration
This process begins with establishing an oversight group, steering committee or executive committee of
cross-sector CEO-level individuals from key organisations engaged with the issue and individuals touched by
the issue.
The oversight group creates the common agenda, defines the boundaries of the effort and sets a strategic
action framework. Thereafter it is recommended that the group meet regularly to oversee the progress of the
entire initiative.
Working groups are formed around each primary leverage point or strategy. Each working group meets
separately, possibly every two weeks, with communication and coordination facilitated by the backbone. The
‘real work’ of the Collective Impact initiative takes place in these groups through a continuous process of
‘planning and doing,’ grounded in constant feedback about what is or is not working.
Working groups develop their own plans for action around specific shared measures. Once plans are
developed, the working groups are then responsible for sharing progress reports and communicating their
activities to build alignment.
The backbone organisation has a role in providing periodic and systematic assessments of the progress being made
by each working group, and presents the results back to the oversight committee that sustains the common agenda.
The number of working groups and the layers of collaboration may change over time. As progress is made, some
groups may end and new ones begin to pursue new strategies defined by the common agenda. All strategies
pursued must clearly link back to the common agenda, to the shared measures, and to each other.
17
COMMON AGENDA
Cascading Levels of Collaboration
Backbone
Organisation
Steering
Committee

Summary of Part Three
It is important to have influential champions and initial investment to support the undertaking of a Collective Impact
initiative. Structures need to be set up to ensure the leaders can commit time to the initiative. Together these
preconditions ensure the base level of influence and resource required to transfer the initiative through the initial
stages from concept to action.
There are three phases to Collective Impact. The first is the ‘Initiate Action’ phase, where a greater understanding
of the problems to overcome and the current solutions available are assessed and better understood. The second
phase is ‘Organise for Impact’, which involves creating the backbone infrastructure and establishing a shared
agreement between the partner organisations as to the goals and measurements for the initiative. The third phase
is ‘Sustain Action and Impact’ which is when each organisation pursues its activity. Data is gathered around how
each organisation’s progress is tracking, and all partner organisations are engaged in learning and improving their
shared approach.
To keep the Collective Impact initiative alive, the backbone organisation plays a central role. It is essentially the
central hub for facilitating partner communication, data analysis, strategy, and funding for initiatives. There is a
specific skillset required of the backbone organisation; namely that it must be adaptive, transparent, and earn the
respect necessary to mobilise and influence people. Government could play a key role in resourcing the
backbone organisation, since this is an important requirement for success.
An oversight group and working groups must be established and meet regularly to communicate and coordinate
progress and give feedback on their work programme. This is important for maintaining shared alignment and
continual learning across the parties. The organisational structure of the initiative and the working groups may
change as the work programme and strategy develops.
18

Conclusive Comments
By 2061 the Māori economy could have grown by $12.3 billion (from $36.9 billion) and created 149,600 job
opportunities. For this to happen, significantly more resource must be dedicated towards developing the capacity,
capability, scale, innovation and leadership within Māori enterprises, and developing the relevant capabilities of
our labour force. The ‘do nothing’ scenario identified in BERL’s ‘The Māori Economy, Science and Innovation’
report is not a viable option. Although this was clearly emphasised by BERL, many of the current solutions that
are aimed at growing the Māori economy have limited impact, and, at best, achieve incremental gains in the levels
of capacity, capability, scale and leadership within Māori enterprises.
New thinking is required into how Government can best support the development of Māori enterprises. Resourcing
Collective Impact initiatives and the economic engines of contributing organisations is an efficient, productive and
financially sustainable solution for Government to achieve the Business Growth Agenda goals. It is more efficient
since a number of quality providers are involved in a more disciplined and coordinated way to bringing their
combined resources and knowledge to help solve a specific and identified common problem. It is a more
productive use of funding because it results in a far better output with wider impacts. Government therefore has a
role in enabling rather than delivering these solutions. Collective Impact is also more financially sustainable since
it improves the economic engines of partner organisations involved, increasing the revenues to fund their
programmes. It is also more equitable because multiple organisations share in the success rather than any one
particular organisation being favoured.
Collective Impact facilitates multiple partner organisations each making a commitment to the whole initiative.
Agreement to the problem definition, the work programme and the measurement systems creates a high level of
stakeholder buy-in. Having a focus on growing partner organisations’ economic engines further incentivises them
to be involved and contribute resources and expertise.
There are many examples of Collective Impact initiatives being successfully implemented, especially in solving
challenging problems. Several have been provided in this report. A number of further case studies are available
on The Foundation Strategy Group (FSG) website, providing further information and detail.
One opportunity that exists to make Collective Impact a reality is to apply the process to a current cross-sector
project that involves Government, the private sector and Māori enterprises. One such initiative that has many of
the key features is with the stakeholders engaged in the Te Hiku Social Development and Wellbeing Accord,
signed in February 2013.
We hope that this analysis of Collective Impact has been useful in informing future decision-making around
processes and policies that Government could implement to maximise the value provided to Māori enterprises.
19
Recommended Next Steps:
1) Review learnings and best practice from a range of Collective Impact initiatives on the FSG website.
2) Develop a business case as to how the Government would implement Collective Impact initiatives for Māori
enterprises
We conducted initial research into the four questions posed at the beginning of this report (Background to
Research Context). The individual findings and conclusions for each complement our above suggestions. While
they do not include full and final analyses of the questions, they do offer basic solutions and we recommend that
more analysis is undertaken into each of these findings to determine their viability. This would maximise the value
for Government in advising Government ministries on necessary policy and strategy changes to deliver the most
impact to growing Māori enterprises.
3) Conduct further ‘thought leadership’ into the specific solutions identified for each question (refer to the
following Appendix pages 20-27)

Question 1
How could the Government help improve the leadership (Governance and Management) of Māori
enterprises?
What is the problem that exists?
Māori enterprise leaders often have multi bottom-line goals and high shareholder expectations of seeing value in
the form of opportunities, more choices and employment. Māori enterprise leaders therefore need to be more
diversely skilled and astute than leaders of purely corporate businesses.
This context means that there are many issues that need to be addressed in Māori enterprise leadership
(governance and management levels) especially to deliver on the goals of BERL’s research. Our latest research
into the challenges of Māori Trusts confirms this (as per the graph below).
There are currently fragmented solutions being provided to improve the capability of Māori enterprise leaders,
particularly in the functional and technical aspects of leadership. Few providers actually help solve the greatest
challenges experienced by Māori leaders (as outlined in the graph above).
The complex nature of these problems highlights why Collective Impact is a credible solution – because it is
motivates service providers to focus their resources and attention collectively and then work together to address
the most important challenges.
Appendix
20
Graph tabling the Māori Trust challenges as outlined by Māori Trust leaders
Rate how each of the following challenges impact the ability of your Trust to achieve its goals?
1 = No Impact
10 = Significant Impact
Source: The Icehouse:- Business Growth Challenges Facing Māori Businesses

Appendix
21
What were the outcomes from our discussions into solutions?
With all of the challenges that need to be addressed, we believe that the greatest return on investment for
Government would be to do three things:
1) Introduce a performance standard for Māori enterprise leadership. Such standards exist in a number of
disciplines and industries. This would need to be supported by governance capability development, especially
as Māori trustees are constantly rotating. Governance training should include more than just a focus on
compliance and understanding governance roles. It should also incorporate business growth lessons around
generating more value from existing resources, building the right team to execute the enterprise goals, and
developing soft skills needed to overcome the political tensions inside Māori enterprises.
2) Further research into potential solutions for each of the challenges identified in the graph above.
3) Find credible existing providers who have successful leadership development programmes for Māori. Use a
Collective Impact initiative to get agreement to the problems and the shared goals and measurements, and
help these organisations scale their impact to grow more Māori enterprise leaders. This would mean more
Māori enterprise leaders are engaged in continuous learning and development and their progress is robustly
and constantly measured.
Mindset, self-awareness and belief in affecting growth and positive
change. Values, trust culture, Acknowledging the tensions in the
organisation and committing to work through these challenges.Aspect 1:
Attitudinal
Setting of visions, goals and appropriate strategies
Aspect 2:
Strategic
Governance, compliance, processes and financial disciplines
Aspect 3:
Functional
Industry specific skills, knowledge and benchmarks
Aspect 4:
Technical
GOVERNANCE
Diagram showing the different aspects of governance that need addressing
Question 1
enterprises?

22
Appendix
Strengths Opportunities
 Increases the likelihood of success for large Māori
enterprises who have significant primary industry
assets to contribute more to the export value chain
 Has the ability to deliver quick results
 Ensures consistency of leaders’ performance
 Cost-savings through optimised operations
 Easy to implement due to standards already
existing in other industries
 Stronger likelihood of Māori Trust boards focusing
more attention on strategic governance
 Creates a competitive advantage among those
enterprises who adopt the standard
 Makes Māori enterprises more competitive
 Reduces business risk, which protects Māori
shareholders
 Better decision-making likely to result in better
returns for Māori whānau
 Establish an organisation to uphold the
standard for Māori leaders’ performance
 Improves collaboration between Māori
organisations and industry groups
 More Māori enterprise leaders qualified in
running an organisation
 Creates pathways for young Māori interested in
becoming Māori enterprise leaders
 Will improve the ability of Māori enterprises to
partner to achieve scale
Weaknesses Threats
 May clash with shareholder autonomy over
selected leaders
 Requires an organisation to focus on routinely
measuring, educating and operating the standard
 More shareholders, particularly older owners
wanting to maintain the status quo
 Lack of Māori at the level required to meet the
standard
 Challenges with policing the standard
SWOT Analysis for this proposed solution:
Introduce a performance standard for Māori enterprise leadership
Question 1
enterprises?

Question 2
How could the Government invest in developing the skills and capabilities of our labour force to unlock
What are the problems?
New Zealand and the rest of the world is facing exponential population growth and rapid technological
advancement that is replacing human labour. This causes growing unemployment, particularly among youth.
When this is coupled with an under-delivering education system, Māori enterprises and Māori whānau face
serious problems in the future. It is not possible for Māori enterprise leaders to accomplish their goals if the labour
force they employ are not skilled appropriately, or are not interested in the jobs within their organisations.
First Problem:
Many Māori youth are unemployable. Māori youth are overwhelmingly not remaining engaged with education long
enough to become qualified for roles beyond semi-skilled labour. We must ensure that Māori on a mass basis
become more engaged with the core subjects in secondary school education. If we are not able to do this, then
the current status quo of disengagement of young Māori will continue and will mean a lack of appropriately trained
Māori to service the whole skill-based sector of employment.
A Solution to First Problem:
Find ways to unleash the untapped potential and capability that sits within our Māori labour force. This starts with
determining how to adapt the secondary education system to better engage non-academic Māori so they can fully
participate in learning. This could be done by creating a taskforce of attuned people who have an understanding
of business; the corporate environment; the education system; and teaching Māori people. All four skillsets must
be present in the taskforce members for them to have a wide appreciation of the different sectors. This group
could then be supported to undertake market research into what young Māori expect from the education system,
why they expect it and how they would like to see education delivered. From this information, a Collective Impact
model could be used to create shared goals and measures, a work plan, and solutions to solving the engagement
problem.
Second Problem:
Māori enterprises often have an aspiration of providing employment for their people, yet the majority of Māori
business interests are in the primary sector, and levels of employment in these industries will continue to fall with
the advancement of technology.
A Solution to Second Problem:
The way to offer more employment and returns to Māori enterprise owners is for people to add value to our
primary industry assets, increase our collective scale, and sell the outputs on the global market. This represents a
move towards the two ends of the value curve. At one side of the value curve is the pre-production design and
development and skills. At the other end are activities that are close to the market such as marketing, sales and
post-sales service. Developing the skills and capabilities that will allow our labour force to participate in these
activities will improve the ability for Māori enterprises to make this a reality. These new activities will then
stimulate whole new industries of job opportunities. The types of skills to invest in are therefore in innovation,
commercialisation and international sales. Government should identify and resource providers that can train
people in taking existing resources and generating more value or outputs from them.
23
Appendix

Question 2
How could the Government invest in developing the skills and capabilities of our labour force to unlock
SWOT Analysis for this proposed solution
Creating a taskforce of attuned people who are able to create an education model for Māori that is more
engaging, relevant and employer demand driven.
24
Appendix
 It solves a systemic issue being lack of skilled
and capable labour force participants
 If successful it would have scalable impact
across the country
 It would not be expensive to fund
 It draws from multi-disciplinary skills
 This would solve an international challenge
 Government could co-invest with philanthropic
entities to fund the taskforce
 It could be appropriate for non-Māori youth also
 It could revolutionise the way that education is
delivered in New Zealand
 It is likely to result in less crime, less social
welfare payments, more employment and more
tax revenue for Government
Weaknesses Threats
 There is no guarantee that it will directly result in
any improved education statistics
 It will not in itself unlock the potential of Māori
enterprises
 The current education system may see it as a
challenge and resist it
 Selecting the wrong people who do not have the
full or appropriate insights
 Motivating the right people to join the taskforce
 If the wrong process was used, it would be
ineffective like many other reviews

Question 3
How could the Government encourage organisations to collaborate efforts to improve Māori enterprises
scale (capacity) and capability?
What is the problem?
There are multiple providers currently aiming to improve Māori enterprise scale and capability. Most of the talk
about collaboration does not result in action to make this happen. Often this collaboration is ineffective because it
is not well supported, resourced or prioritised, and there is no disciplined approach to ensuring execution. If we do
not achieve scale, we fail to recognise the leverage, this creates, and jeopardise sustainability. Fragmentation
and disaggregation means missed opportunities, and could eventually lead to loss of Māori assets and equity.
What is our proposed solution?
Out of all of the solutions we looked into, Collective Impact demonstrates the best model as a solution for
Government to increase scale of capability and capacity of Māori enterprises. Collective Impact, as mentioned in
the main body of the report, is more than just collaboration. Shifting from isolated impact to Collective Impact
represents a fundamentally different, more disciplined and higher performing approach. For it to work, there
needs to be more than just greater collaboration or public-private partnerships. It requires a systemic approach to
progressing shared objectives among aligned organisations. It also requires a new set of organisations that have
the facilitation skills and resources to assemble and co-ordinate the specific elements and relationships required
for Collective Impact.
Supporting, resourcing and implementing Collective Impact initiatives
25
Appendix
 Is a win-win-win scenario for those involved
 Solves multiple and complex challenges
 Is not favourable to any one organisation
 Is an effective and efficient use of resources
 Low risk
 Well proven in many different contexts
 No known policy changes required
 The necessary resources already exist
 By including a focus on growing the economic
engines of partner organisations, Government
would then no longer have to fund the delivery of
their programmes
 Local Governments and not-for profits are
already exploring it
 Ministry of Social Development have begun
investigating it
Weaknesses Threats
 It has low exposure and therefore requires multi-
sector marketing and awareness of its value and
how the process works
 It requires trust and honesty from multiple
organisations
 If the backbone organisation is a local
Government or Government organisation, then
the risk increases around internal policies and
processes stifling operational effectiveness

Question 4
How could the Government get genuine engagement between Māori enterprises and the science and
innovation sector?
What is the problem?
Each year more than $1.5 billion is invested by Government into the science and innovation sector. The problem
is not with the level of funding into research and development. It is about focusing this money in the right way to
get the desired results.
Government’s science and innovation services offered to Māori enterprises are solving the wrong problems for
them. They are not creating the most value for Māori enterprises. If the services represented a good opportunity
and solved a real need then there would be less engagement issues between Māori enterprises and the science
and innovation sector.
Currently ‘research and development’ is overly focused on research outputs. Research has become a goal in
itself rather than being a route to helping Māori enterprises. This mismatch exists because research and
development grant requirements are often created by scientists for scientists. This perpetuates an inherent bias
towards research solutions and the science community rather than what is sought after by Māori enterprises.
26
Appendix
Vision Matauranga example
For example, the current Vision Matauranga funding from Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
aims to:
 Help increase connections and collaborations between Māori organisations and individual researchers and
research organisations;
 Support the development of individual researchers who undertake work with Māori organisations;
 Increase, strengthen, and improve knowledge transfer between researchers, stakeholders and research
users to unlock Māori innovation potential
The programme places skilled researchers from a research organisation to carry out a work programme with a
Māori enterprise. It does not directly fund development experts to work with Māori enterprises and foster an
understanding of commercialisation that could unlock Māori knowledge, resources and people.
“Māori businesses often do not fit the mould of the science and innovation system, making it difficult
for them to get funding. Rather than trying to squeeze ourselves into a Pākehā perception of science
and innovation, we have to sell what makes us different and why that difference is important.”
Ian Taylor, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngā Puhi
“I agree that current research funding sitting in isolation in academic institutions is a barrier.”
Shelley Campbell, Ngā Puhi, Ngāti Maniapoto
(CEO of the Sir Peter Blake Trust; Sir Peter Blake Trust Leadership Award recipient)

Allocating more funding towards development initiatives rather than research
27
Appendix
 Improves the science and innovation
engagement with Māori enterprises
 Aligns to Government Business Growth Agenda
– business led rather than science led
 Results in tangible outcomes
 Low cost for the Government to implement (for
example a framework exists for the Capability
Development vouchers)
 Creates word of mouth because it solves an
identified need/challenge
 Once the business development experts are
engaged, they can identify areas of science that
are relevant and necessary to exploit the real
commercial opportunities identified
 Improves the productivity of the science industry
 Results in more scale, consolidation and co-
investment among Māori enterprises/iwi around
identified opportunities
 Assists Māori to determine higher value chain
areas that they can own and manage
 Greater potential for new Māori exports
Weaknesses Threats
 Research institutions would need to build
development capability
 Not as efficient, productive and sustainable as
the Collective Impact model
 Science and research industries incentivised to
maintain the status quo
 Bureaucratic bias towards science led initiatives
as opposed to business led initiatives
Question 4
How could the Government get genuine engagement between Māori enterprises and the science and
innovation sector?
The recommended actions for Government:
1) Validate the Māori enterprise market needs to inform science and innovation services that can unlock Māori
knowledge, resources and people.
2) Allocate more funding towards development initiatives to achieve a better return on investment than funding
research. Many iwi enterprises have assets, and are keen to look at developing them, but they do not have
the expertise to progress such strategies (supported by graph on page 20). What is required is a grant that is
geared up to support a development expert to work with the Māori enterprise to identify how they might best
develop their resources.

Business and Economic Research Limited, (2010), The Māori Economy - A sleeping giant about to awaken?
http://www.berl.co.nz/economic-insights/economic-development/maori-economy/the-maori-economy-a-sleeping-
giant-about-to-awaken/
Business and Economic Research Limited, (2011), The Asset Base, Income, Expenditure and GDP of the 2010
Māori Economy
Business and Economic Research Limited, (2012), The Māori Economy, Science and Innovation
Building Innovation progress report (2012)
http://www.mbie.govt.nz/what-we-do/business-growth-agenda/building-innovation
Dan Pallotta, (2013), The Way We Think About Charity is Dead Wrong
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong.html
GEM, (2006), The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Aotearoa New Zealand
http://www.gemconsortium.org/docs/download/719
Grameen Bank, A Short History of Grameen Bank
http://www.grameen-info.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19&Itemid=114
James C. Collins, (2001), Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...and Others Don't
Larry Keeley, Doblin (200), Ten Types of Innovation: The Discipline of Building Breakthroughs
http://issuu.com/doblin/docs/tentypesofinnovation_bookpreview#embed
Stanford Social Innovation, (2012), Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work
Stanford Social Innovation, (2011), Collective Impact
Te Hiku Iwi Development Trust, (2013), Social Development Accord for Te Hiku Iwi in the Far North
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1306/S00372/social-development-accord-for-te-hiku-iwi-in-the-far-north.htm
Te Puni Kōkiri, (2003), Hei Whakatinana I te Turua Po: Business Success and Māori Organisational Governance
Management Study
http://www.tpk.govt.nz/_documents/governance/tpk-hei-whakatinana-2003.pdf
The Icehouse, (2013), Supporting Māori Businesses to Grow to Internationally Competitive Standards
http://www.theicehouse.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/TPK-ICEHOUSE-Maori-alumni-feedback-Feb-2013.pdf
The Icehouse, (2013), Business Growth Challenges Facing Māori Businesses
Travis Bradberry, (2009), Emotional Intelligence 2.0
Foundation Strategy Group, Knowledge Exchange webpage (examples of Collective Impact)
http://www.fsg.org/KnowledgeExchange.aspx
28
References

Ian Taylor, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngā Puhi
At school in the 50’s and 60’s I was never taught the truly inspirational stories of our ancestors - how they traded
across the globe, how they explored one third of the planet, or how they traded seal skins with China over 200
years ago. We lost a generation of stories that should have inspired us and given us a sense of our place in the
world. I have a sense this is changing; we are reclaiming those stories. Now it is time for iwi to rebuild our pride
and relevance and look at creating new opportunities for our young people to take on the world.
Employment
A silent epidemic facing the world is youth unemployment. In New Zealand, 14 percent of Māori are unemployed.
Māori businesses have an opportunity to do something about it. It is time that we stepped up and started taking
control of the issue, with or without the Government. The challenge we face is that employment growth will not
come out of our traditional industries. It will take time to build, but it is critical that we start investing in the new
industries that will create high employment. Everywhere we invest has got to be about creating high value jobs for
kids from the age of 18-25, because if we don’t we’ll lose them.
If we do have a legitimate Māori economic engine, then let’s make sure that we use it to create new kinds of
industry opportunities in the knowledge based economy; industries that excite our young people. Māori are good
at putting our distinctiveness into property development and tourism. Now let’s go for the next level, and find
companies that can create high value employment for our rangatahi. To excite our youth at school, they need to
see that there is a pathway to employment for them. We need to focus on creating jobs that fit the skills of Māori,
and then lift these skills so we go to the next step as well. If our Māori economic engine is used for the purpose of
creating jobs in future-focussed industries, then this will have the added benefit of achieving Government priorities
around employment.
Economic Engines
I like the concept of investing in economic engines, particularly those that can drive employment and create high
value jobs for our young people. It is essential that the growing $37 billion Māori economy recognises the need to
expand outside of the primary and service industries and into high-value, globally focussed knowledge industries
that are the future for both our people and our country. We shouldn’t wait for the Government to lead the way
here. We need to see Māori organisation investing in economic engines of proven, successful businesses, Māori
and non-Māori, to enable them to grow.
As long as we make sure these businesses are in industries that can thrive in the future. They can add value to
our existing primary industry businesses, and create new and yet-to-be recognised opportunities in knowledge
based industries as well. If we pull we off we will generate new money, new work and new jobs.
Collective Impact
Given the priorities of Māori organisations, it is important to simplify our targets and goals, make them human, and
make them understandable.
Science System
Māori businesses often do not fit the mould of the science and innovation system, making it difficult for them to get
funding. Rather than trying to squeeze ourselves into a Pākehā perception of science and innovation, we have to
sell what makes us different and why that difference is important.
29
Contributors Notes

Grahame Christian, Ngāti Huarere, Ngāti Maru
(Managing Director and shareholder of SMART Environmental Ltd; Chair of Pare Hauraki Asset Holdings)
I have read the document and provided suggestions from an entrepreneurial, rather than academic, perspective.
Whilst we are trying to build a ‘Māori economic engine’ and employment for our people, as a people we have to:
 Address the “institutional apathy” and psyche that we have fallen into.
 Change our mindset from being the victim to victor.
 Agree that we will no longer accept our over-representation in all of the wrong statistics, i.e. crime, single
parent families, obesity, health, unemployment, alcohol, drugs, smoking.
 Expose the criminals and drug suppliers amongst our whānau, hapū and iwi as a signal of progress.
 Celebrate educational achievement and getting a job as a measure of success, and stop finding reasons
why we cannot do these.
 Embrace role models off the sports pitch such as business people, educators and people who have made
good choices (whilst forgiving those who haven’t).
A key to a successful initiative would be to ensure that the right people are on the bus within the stakeholder
organisations. My limited exposure to iwi organisations suggests that there is a massive void in terms of their
success and internal capability. The desire of some iwi to elevate themselves and their people does not address
the issue of capability. So as stakeholders in these initiatives, they can possibly only be as good as the people
that are appointed to the management roles. With lack of skills and limited experience, some of the initiatives may
not be properly executed.
As part of building effective teams, Māori should not be afraid to have “outsiders” in the team. There are many
non-Māori who love working in Māori organisations and have a huge amount to offer, particularly as they do not
come from a grievance background, they are not burdened with the past, and often work altruistically.
There are too few skilled Māori who are thrust into leadership roles, and consequently wear too many hats and are
burdened with expectations. This often means they get totally burnt out and become less and less effective.
Often Māori organisations do not trust each other, and are unprofessional, grasping and appear disorganised. This
prevents a lot of business owners from wanting to partner with iwi, even if it suggests a sensible business
opportunity.
Where possible, iwi organisations should be developing relationships with Local, Regional and Central
Government (i.e. like Ngāi Tahu is doing), and should be working closely with them on their future annual and long
term plans. Early alignment will see these parties build Māori interests into their long term and aspirational plans.
Funding will then be allocated to these activities and many of these parties will provide land, buildings and funding
for initiatives that will drive economic development. This is safe money.
30
Contributors Notes

Growing The Maori Economic Engine

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Growing The Maori Economic Engine

Similar to Growing The Maori Economic Engine (20)

More from Eco-Lifestle Club

More from Eco-Lifestle Club (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Growing The Maori Economic Engine