Thanks for all the great interest in this article. We have heard many positive comments across the industry about the potential for micro-equity offerings to help savings group members. We’ve also heard a couple of questions along the way about what we are doing to mitigate the potential risk to end users. These are great questions, especially when vulnerable people are involved, so we thought it might be helpful to add a bit more context on this front.
1) The micro-equity projects we have done to date have been designed together with savings groups, asking the input of both group leaders and regular members at every step. We use a human centered design approach for these offerings, proposing ideas, asking for feedback, and modifying terms to fit what group members believe is fair. After listening to user feedback, we take a solution to the pilot phase only when everyone involved understands the terms, is confident they are getting good value, and agrees to move forward.
2) This offering has been designed in collaboration with our NGO partners. Every meeting with group members has occurred with NGO partners present, ensuring that we are learning together, and that any concerns or risks are noted and addressed early on.
3) Once the initial micro-equity offerings passed the open design phase, participation was entirely voluntary for groups and members. In all cases, we were very clear that groups were more than welcome to continue using DreamSave for free with no obligation whatsoever. In all cases, the groups who participated were excited to try it and did so voluntarily.
4) After the first full cycle of taking a micro-equity investment and seeing positive benefits such as increased savings and increased profits for all group members, 100% of members said they liked it and wanted to sign up again.
5) Our NGO partners participated in our evaluation of the first pilots, and their M&E teams lead an evaluation and reported favorable findings.
As with any new idea, we are constantly listening to our users for ways to improve solutions like this. Each pilot includes focus groups in the beginning to get user input, as well as discussions with group leaders and individual members at the end to hear their honest feedback after trying the solution. Many of the ideas you see in our original blog post came directly from savings group members — as did various improvements and safeguards we have added since. We’ve also found that different countries and cultures may require variations to better fit what users want.
While we are in the early stages of innovations like this, we are encouraged by the results so far. Throughout this process, our top priority has been to establish trust with groups. We’ve found that when you are open and transparent with end users, they tend to be open and transparent with you. If they like an idea, you’ll know. Conversely, if they think a proposal is unfair or risky in any way, they won’t hesitate to tell you. This kind of feedback has been invaluable in designing our micro-equity offerings to date and will continue to be essential as we learn from customers and improve it in the future.
Thanks for all the great interest in this article. We have heard many positive comments across the industry about the potential for micro-equity offerings to help savings group members. We’ve also heard a couple of questions along the way about what we are doing to mitigate the potential risk to end users. These are great questions, especially when vulnerable people are involved, so we thought it might be helpful to add a bit more context on this front.
1) The micro-equity projects we have done to date have been designed together with savings groups, asking the input of both group leaders and regular members at every step. We use a human centered design approach for these offerings, proposing ideas, asking for feedback, and modifying terms to fit what group members believe is fair. After listening to user feedback, we take a solution to the pilot phase only when everyone involved understands the terms, is confident they are getting good value, and agrees to move forward.
2) This offering has been designed in collaboration with our NGO partners. Every meeting with group members has occurred with NGO partners present, ensuring that we are learning together, and that any concerns or risks are noted and addressed early on.
3) Once the initial micro-equity offerings passed the open design phase, participation was entirely voluntary for groups and members. In all cases, we were very clear that groups were more than welcome to continue using DreamSave for free with no obligation whatsoever. In all cases, the groups who participated were excited to try it and did so voluntarily.
4) After the first full cycle of taking a micro-equity investment and seeing positive benefits such as increased savings and increased profits for all group members, 100% of members said they liked it and wanted to sign up again.
5) Our NGO partners participated in our evaluation of the first pilots, and their M&E teams lead an evaluation and reported favorable findings.
As with any new idea, we are constantly listening to our users for ways to improve solutions like this. Each pilot includes focus groups in the beginning to get user input, as well as discussions with group leaders and individual members at the end to hear their honest feedback after trying the solution. Many of the ideas you see in our original blog post came directly from savings group members — as did various improvements and safeguards we have added since. We’ve also found that different countries and cultures may require variations to better fit what users want.
While we are in the early stages of innovations like this, we are encouraged by the results so far. Throughout this process, our top priority has been to establish trust with groups. We’ve found that when you are open and transparent with end users, they tend to be open and transparent with you. If they like an idea, you’ll know. Conversely, if they think a proposal is unfair or risky in any way, they won’t hesitate to tell you. This kind of feedback has been invaluable in designing our micro-equity offerings to date and will continue to be essential as we learn from customers and improve it in the future.