Lifting the Lid Off the Toilet—Understanding the Indian Context and A Case on Samagra Empowerment Foundation

Abstract

This case features Samagra, an Indian social enterprise which was formed with the goal to tackle the wicked problem of open defecation in India by providing dignified toilet access to millions living in urban slums. In 2017, two equally passionate members, a gifted engineer, Rahul Nayak, and an educator, Iti Mathur, joined their team. Samagra’s original business model focused on building and maintaining toilets for the urban poor. However, by 2017, having gone through multiple business model iterations, they had revised their business to use state-of-the-art technology and reduce the operating expenses of school, public, and community toilets in urban slums of Pune. By 2017, Samagra had developed memorandums of understandings (MOUs) with 6 municipalities across the country to build & maintain public and community toilets.

Dr. Aparna Venugopal, the corresponding author, a Research Associate at the University of New Brunswick (UNB), Dr. David Foord, Assistant Professor and Director of Innovation at UNB, and Mr. Muthu Singaram, CEO, HTIC, IIT Madras, researched and prepared the original version of this case. A company designate has reviewed and approved the manuscript. This case is not an endorsement for Samagra Foundation, a source of primary data on Samagra or an illustration of the effective or ineffective management of Samagra. This study was approved by the UNB Research Ethics Board under file no REB 2019-071. Please do not share without the permission of the corresponding author.

Brief Teaching Note

(Please contact the authors to receive the detailed teaching note)

Teaching Objectives and Positioning

This case can be used to initiate discussion on a variety of management topics including:

• 1. Influence of historical narratives on how entrepreneurs develop technical solutions to compete with existing technology and solve social problems.

• 2. Importance of engagement of stakeholders in solving social problems.

• 3. Influence of environmental variables on how entrepreneurs choose specific institutional mechanisms to legitimize a business model within a technological regime.

• 4. Strategies to adapt business models and sustain engagement of stakeholders with varied risks and benefits.

Background Readings

• 1. Geels, F. W. (2006). The Hygienic Transition from Cesspools to Sewer Systems (1840–1930): The Dynamics of Regime Transformation. Research Policy, 35(7), 1069–1082.

• 2. Ostrom, E. (2009). A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science, 325(5939), 419–422.

Assignment Questions

• 1. How does the historical and social context of the land affect Samagra’s strategic orientation?

• 2. How does Samagra 2.0 manage to engage stakeholders better than Samagra 1.0?

• 3. Discuss why Samagra chooses to employ a coercive institutional mechanism and monitor the governance of public toilets.

• 4. Use Ostrom’s Social-Ecological Systems framework to analyze the sustainability of Samagra 2.0.

Target Audiences and Courseware

We have prepared this case for teaching graduate level business, technology management, entrepreneurship, and public policy students. In this teaching note, we have provided different discussion avenues such as strategy, entrepreneurship, sustainability, and public policy dissemination.

Case Analysis and Class Process

Assignment questions	Case discussion	Class process	Duration (3 hours)
How does the historical and social context of the land affect Samagra’s strategic orientation?	As depicted in the failure of Vihar water works project, and Samagra 1.0 ages later, the complex context necessitates enhanced stakeholder engagement and Samagra 2.0 eventually chooses a business model that facilitates such deep interactions with vested parties	Instructor introduces the case and invites the class to suggest if and why and how they think the Indian context has influenced Samagra’s strategic orientation	30 minutes
How does Samagra 2.0 manage to engage stakeholders better than Samagra 1.0?	Samagra’s stakeholders are identified as the community toilet users, ULBs, maintenance workers, bureaucrats, community leaders, and local politicians. The class identifies how Samagra 1.0’s interactions with all the relevant stakeholders were limited	Instructor asks the class to opine on whether Samagra 2.0 does indeed provide better stakeholder engagement than Samagra 1.0 and encourages the class to debate and justify their observations	20 minutes
Discuss why Samagra chooses to employ a coercive institutional mechanism and monitor the governance of public toilets	Outsiders/entrepreneurs enter socio technical systems of transition employing one of the three institutional field mechanisms of coercion, mimicry, or norms. The technological regime and the social context affects the outsider’s choice of institutional field mechanisms	The class is asked to come prepared with the background reading on Geel’s article and identify whether Samagra does enter India’s hygiene transition as an outsider entering the technological regime	40 minutes
10 minutes break
Use Ostrom’s Social-Ecological Systems framework to analyze the sustainability of Samagra 2.0	Ostrom’s SES framework highlights the interactions between the social economic and political systems, users, outcomes, and related ecosystems. The same framework can be used to explain Samagra’s choice of 2.0 business model	The class is asked to come prepared with the background readings and invited to present their analysis of Samagra 2.0 using Ostrom’s framework	20 minutes
Debriefing	All the key concepts on sustainability framework analysis and technological regimes are highlighted in the debrief on the case	Instructor briefs the class on the various sustainable technical alternatives Samagra can employ to engage the various stakeholders and how the Indian context necessitates intense stakeholder engagement in solving social problems	40 minutes