Asset 49.png


Technology should enhance rather than replace teachers.

Evidence suggests that learning software and other tech tools can improve educational outcomes, but are not replacements for strong, in-person interactions and learning from teachers. In fact, technology tools show the strongest learning outcomes when combined with strong curricula, motivated and talented teachers, etc.


Impact on educational outcomes is the central goal.

Everyone benefits if learning can be personalized for children through the collection of data. Parents and educators should provide informed consent for this data to be collected and it should not be used for advertising or other sources of revenue.


There is no one-size fits all approach.

It is not enough to demonstrate that children like using a product and use it regularly. Tech players need to show (and hold themselves accountable to) changes in learning outcomes.


Children have the right to privacy.

Consider local contexts and how solutions can be adapted to local needs and ways of learning.


Diversity in access.

The people who start and complete skilling courses are a small subset of the population that could benefit from it and in many cases skews towards people who already have a relatively high level of education or employment. Efforts to attract new market segments and to include groups who are underrepresented in TVET and tertiary education will help increase impact.


Impact on employment outcomes is the central goal.

It is not enough to measure success by number of sign-ups. Tech players need to show (and hold themselves accountable to) changes in employment outcomes in the years following the end of the course.


Industry standards for skilling requires collaboration.

Definition (and certification) of the standards that are required for different types of employment (e.g. data scientist) should come out of collaboration between educators and employers, where possible.


Access should be as broad as possible.

Private healthcare companies are an important stakeholder in the pursuit of universal access to healthcare, including access to potentially life saving emergency care. As far as it is possible, private companies should work to increase access for segments who have not historically been able to afford private ambulances.


Minimum standards are needed for emergency care and transport.

Investors and innovators have a responsibility to ensure the quality of the providers that are available on their platform, including ensuring that the quality of staff and vehicles does not go beyond the minimum required.


Alternative methods and redundancy are needed.

In an emergency, users should not have to rely solely on a good internet connection or a functioning smartphone. Best practice providers will have a hotline and 24 hour support to ensure that technical problems do not get in the way of the fastest possible response.


Safety is the priority.

The costs of poorly designed or maintained products is too high when people’s lives are at stake. Innovators should commit to rigorous and regular testing for reliability.



Worker protections should be universal.

Benefits and protections should be universal, applying to all workers and
all forms of employment.


Workers deserve fair wages.

Recruiting platforms should not be leading a race to the bottom, where efficiencies are found by cutting the wages and minimum hours of workers.

Platforms need to fight discrimination.

On many platforms, users have the right to hire, fire and provide feedback on workers but are not subject to normal oversight. Platforms should be designed to identify and mitigate patterns of discrimination.

Benefits and protections should be portable.

Given that workers often use more than one application, their benefits and protections need to be attached to them  rather than to their employers. Employer contributions. E.g., could be pro-rated depending on time worked.

Safety should be prioritized in design.

Platforms have an obligation to protect all their users and workers and should have integrated safety features and robust policies on reporting and acting on all reports of harassment or abuse.

Asset 49.png


Safety of riders is the first priority.

Investors and innovators have an obligation to minimize risk of harassment. For example, it should be possible for employees to easily and anonymously opt out of riding with another colleague. Collaboration with employers and authorities to resolve serious and criminal cases of harassment should be the norm, and innovators should hold themselves to account for safety even in countries where safety regulation (or its enforcement) is insufficient.

Effective transport systems require collaboration.

As cities evolve, multimodal journeys are becoming more and more the norm. Ride sharing is part of solution, but so is public transport, cycling etc. Investors and innovators should try to work with city leaders and planners, contributing to holistic solutions that reduce congestion, reduce pollution and decrease the cost of commuting for low income segments in particular.

Asset 49.png


Work with utility companies that are committed to increasing access.

The reduction in costs from the automation of meter checks and the reduction of non-revenue water, does not necessarily translate into better service for users. As much as it possible, innovators and investors should work with utilities to ensure that metering projects actually result in improvements for citizens, particularly those at the base of the pyramid.

Customer data should be stored and used appropriately.

Customers and utility companies benefit when the (near) real-time  data provided by smart meters is used to improve the efficiency of service, for example by better anticipating surges in demand or possible shortages in the system. At the same time, investors and innovators should ensure adequate privacy protections for users, including explicit and informed consent on how data is collected and used by the innovators, utility companies and third parties.