Welcome to part II of the “Endeavor” series. You may recall that part I involved a rather interesting conversation with Dan Isenberg, a Harvard Business School professor who had written a case about Endeavor entrepreneur, Lapdesk. Given that dialogue, it seemed only natural to continue the dialogue with Shane Immelman, founder and CEO of Lapdesk. So with no further ado, let’s have a chat with Shane.

Tayo Akinyemi, NextBillion.net:
What inspired you to found Lapdesk?

Shane Immelman, Lapdesk:
Simply put - if we ever hope to meaningfully address global poverty, then the answer must be to provide children in emerging markets with quality education - by doing so we will at least ensure that these children will be equipped to participate effectively in the societies within which they live, and will then have the opportunity to create a better future for themselves. The Lapdesk Company was founded with this in mind, as tens of millions of children the world over lack basic infrastructural equipment that will contribute to their quality education - a classroom desk.

(This post continues past the break; click "Read More" to continue)

Microfinance, in its for-profit avatar, is attracting capital, talent, blogposts - you name it - and a fair bit of criticism. So when Alex Counts, President & CEO of the Grameen Foundation proposed his vision for Reimagining Microfinance in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, he targeted the right issues. The problem, as I see it, is that elements of Counts' vision are simply not realistic.

I agree with Alex that microfinance is better placed as a platform from which to develop and distribute a range of products and services—not just financial ones. I also agree that microfinance institutions stand to gain by structuring themselves to gain from high volume, not high margin models. This will help not just in terms of revenue, but also in terms of managing what can be a precarious political environment for MFIs and their investors.

An excerpt from an article (The Big Trouble With Small Loans) in TIME Magazine illustrates the line MFIs must tread:

Consider the time a bank chairman asked if SKS could raise its interest rates. Akula said yes (in most markets it has a monopoly) but that SKS wouldn't do so because it would be exploitative. The banker scoffed that Akula didn't understand economics. Akula shot back that the banker didn't understand customers, who would turn on SKS if they felt abused. "We're maintaining a loyal customer base that will stay with us as they get out of poverty," says Akula.

(Full disclosure: I work at SKS Microfinance)

However, in my view, Counts goes too far and becomes too idealistic in the proposals that follow.

(This post continues past the break; click "Read More" to continue)