How the Private Sector Can Help Scale Social Innovation: Lessons from ChangeNow 2026

What social innovators actually need from the private sector — and who's getting it right

Last week at ChangeNow in Paris, the Crystal Bubble filled up for a session titled "Scaling AI for Good: The Role of the Private Sector in Accelerating Impact Startups." Corporate leaders from Microsoft and EY sat alongside social entrepreneur Moyo Asubiojo of EduTech, Sophia Otoo from the World Economic Forum's Schwab Foundation, and our team at MovingWorlds. The room was packed — standing room only — and the conversation was energetic.

But here's the thing: while the session was framed around AI, the most important insights had very little to do with the technology itself. They were about something much bigger — a shift in how the most effective CSR leaders are thinking about their role in the social innovation ecosystem. And that shift applies whether you're working on AI, climate, health, education, or economic opportunity.

The real question the session surfaced was this: What do social innovators actually need from the private sector — and who's delivering it?

Start with the research: What social innovators are asking for

Sophia Otoo opened with data from the World Economic Forum's AI for Impact report, developed in partnership with EY and Microsoft. The findings are sobering. Of the hundreds of billions flowing into AI investment globally, less than 1% is directed toward impact-focused initiatives. And most of that limited funding concentrates in high-income countries, even though some of the most promising social innovation is happening in low- and middle-income regions.

But the more useful part of Sophia's presentation wasn't the funding gap. It was the framework her team developed for what social innovators actually need from the ecosystem around them. Four things stood out:

Aligned funding models that match how social enterprises actually grow, rather than forcing them into grant cycles designed for traditional nonprofits.

Investment in infrastructure — the shared rails that let social innovators plug into markets, customers, and opportunities without having to build everything from scratch.

Capacity and skills building that gives entrepreneurs access to the specialized expertise they can't afford to hire.

Stronger ecosystem coordination so that the various actors trying to help — corporates, intermediaries, investors, governments — aren't tripping over each other or duplicating effort.

This is the scaffolding I want to hang the rest of this post on. Because when you look at the CSR programs that are actually moving the needle right now, they're the ones designed around these four needs — not around what looks good in an annual report.

The Schwab Foundation deserves real credit for doing this research and making it public. It gives CSR leaders a concrete map of where to focus, backed by evidence from hundreds of social innovators around the world. If you haven't read the AI for Impact reports, they're worth your time — and they apply far beyond AI.

Understanding comes first: What Moyo taught the room

Before we get to the corporate case studies, I want to pause on something that happened midway through the session.

Moyo Asubiojo, the CEO of EduTech, shared the story of how her company uses AI to improve learning outcomes in Nigeria. She talked about the constraints she navigates daily — infrastructure gaps, data limitations, the pace at which her team has to move, the creativity required to build something that actually works in her context. She also talked, with remarkable clarity, about what kinds of corporate partnerships had actually helped her grow, and which had wasted her time.

What struck me listening to her wasn't the AI story. It was how obvious it became, in that moment, that most corporate CSR programs are designed without ever really understanding what entrepreneurs like Moyo are up against. Programs get built in boardrooms, rolled out through intermediaries, and measured by activity metrics — all before anyone has actually sat down with a social entrepreneur and asked, "What would actually move the needle for you?"

The best CSR programs I've encountered over the past decade all share one thing: they start with listening. Not a feel-good kind of listening, but the rigorous kind that reshapes how you deploy resources. They treat social entrepreneurs as the experts on their own work, and they build support around what those entrepreneurs say they need.

Which brings us to three companies that are doing exactly that — each in a different way, and each addressing a different piece of the puzzle Sophia's research laid out.

Microsoft: Turning business motions into impact infrastructure

When most people think about Microsoft's support for social innovators, they think about Azure credits. And yes, pro bono cloud access matters. But the more interesting story — the one Anthony Virapin shared on the panel — is what Microsoft does beyond the grants.

Through its Entrepreneurship for Positive Impact (EfPI) program, Microsoft opens up something far more valuable than its philanthropic budget: its commercial machinery. Social innovators in the program get access to Microsoft's co-sell motion, which means their solutions can be positioned to Microsoft's enterprise clients through the same sales teams that sell to the Fortune 500. They get invited to customer roadshows, industry events, and marketplace activations. They become strategic partners in how Microsoft shows up to its own customers.

Anthony described this as a deliberate cultural shift: encouraging Microsoft's sales teams to see impact startups not as charity recipients, but as genuine value-adds for their clients. He was also direct about why this matters. "We're moving from philanthropy-led initiatives to business-driven partnerships tied to growth and differentiation," he said. That framing is important. It's not that philanthropy is bad — it's that philanthropy alone will never match the leverage a company can create by opening its business operations to social innovators.

This is what "investment in infrastructure" looks like in practice. Microsoft isn't building new programs from scratch. They're taking infrastructure that already exists — the sales network, the partner ecosystem, the global field teams — and extending access to it. For a social enterprise, getting introduced to a Fortune 500 buyer through Microsoft is worth far more than a grant.

The takeaway for CSR leaders: Your biggest assets probably aren't in your CSR budget. They're in your commercial operations. The question is whether you've built the internal partnerships to unlock them.

EY: Combining skilled professionals with ecosystem building

EY takes a different angle, and Emily Will articulated it well during the panel. EY's global impact program, EY Ripples, has committed to positively impact one billion lives by 2030. That's an ambitious number, and the way they're pursuing it reveals a sophisticated theory of change.

The most visible part of EY Ripples is the skilled volunteering work. EY professionals — real consultants, real accountants, real strategists — provide coaching and pro bono services to social entrepreneurs and impact-focused nonprofits. This isn't resume-review volunteering. It's EY people bringing their day-job expertise to the organizations that need it most. Emily emphasized that this kind of skills-based volunteering only works when the support is genuinely matched to what the entrepreneur needs, delivered by people who know what they're doing.

But what I find most interesting about EY's approach is the second layer: EY invests heavily in ecosystem building itself. They co-author research with the World Economic Forum (including the AI for Impact reports Sophia referenced). They partner with organizations like MovingWorlds to design and deliver programs that reach entrepreneurs neither organization could reach alone. They show up at conferences like ChangeNow not just to promote their own programs, but to build the shared infrastructure that makes everyone's work more effective.

This combination — skilled human capital plus investment in the ecosystem rails — is what sets EY Ripples apart from a lot of well-intentioned corporate volunteering programs. It addresses two of Sophia's four needs simultaneously: capacity and skills building, and stronger ecosystem coordination.

The takeaway for CSR leaders: The best programs don't just deploy your people to do good work. They also invest in the connective tissue that makes the whole sector more effective. Ask yourself: are you building your own program in isolation, or are you contributing to the shared infrastructure the field needs?

SAP: Building the plumbing for social procurement

SAP didn't have a speaker on the Crystal Bubble panel, but their fingerprints were all over the conversation — and across the Scaling AI for Good program that MovingWorlds runs in collaboration with SAP, EY, and Microsoft. SAP is perhaps the quietest of these three examples, but in some ways the most systemic.

SAP's approach to social innovation operates on three layers, and they work together in a way that's worth studying.

First, there's the SAP Business Network (formerly Ariba) — one of the largest B2B procurement networks in the world. SAP has been working to make it easier for corporate buyers on the network to find and purchase from social enterprises. Think about the leverage of that move: instead of running a single volunteer program, SAP is building market infrastructure that lets every company using Ariba connect with impact suppliers. It's the kind of move that only a company in SAP's position could make, and it's a textbook example of using a core business asset to move the needle on a systemic issue.

Second, there's the Acceleration Collective, SAP's skills-based volunteering program that matches SAP employees with social entrepreneurs for pro bono consulting engagements. Like EY Ripples, it focuses on bringing real expertise — not easy-to-plan volunteer projects — to entrepreneurs who can actually use it.

Third, SAP invests in cross-sector programs alongside other companies. Their collaboration with EY, Microsoft, and MovingWorlds on Scaling AI for Good is a good example. None of these companies are trying to own the program. They're pooling resources, expertise, and networks because they understand that the challenges social innovators face are bigger than any one corporate partner can solve.

What ties all three layers together is SAP's long-standing commitment to social procurement as a category. They're not just doing one program — they're making the case, across the sector, that buying from social enterprises should be a standard part of how large companies operate.

The takeaway for CSR leaders: Some of the most important moves you can make aren't in your CSR portfolio at all. They're in procurement, supply chain, and product. Who in your company has the relationships to unlock those levers?

The pattern worth paying attention to

Look across these three examples, and a pattern emerges. Microsoft, EY, and SAP are doing very different things. But what they share is more important than what distinguishes them:

They start from business strategy, not philanthropy. Every one of these programs is grounded in what the company is already good at — what it sells, who it employs, what infrastructure it operates. That alignment is what makes the programs sustainable through economic cycles and leadership changes.

They use assets the company already has. None of these are programs that required building new capabilities from scratch. They extend existing capabilities to new beneficiaries.

They partner with ecosystem builders rather than going it alone. They work with WEF, with MovingWorlds, with intermediaries and research institutions, because they recognize that the problems are too big for any one company.

And they commit for the long haul. These aren't one-year campaigns. They're multi-year investments in systems change.

I should be honest about something: none of these programs are finished, and I suspect leaders at each of these companies would tell you they're still figuring it out. The work is hard, the feedback loops are long, and the pressure to show quick wins is constant. But the direction of travel is right, and that matters.

Questions for CSR leaders

If you're a CSR leader reading this and wondering how to apply it, here are the questions I'd take back to your team:

Which of your business motions could create real opportunity for social innovators? Sales, procurement, product development, customer events — where could you extend access?

Where are you building ecosystem infrastructure, versus launching standalone programs? And if you're building standalone programs, why?

Who are the ecosystem partners you're learning from? If you can't name three, that's worth addressing.

How are you actually measuring whether entrepreneurs grow because of your involvement? Not activity, not dollars deployed — actual growth outcomes for the organizations you're trying to support.

A closing thought

The most valuable thing about the ChangeNow session wasn't the AI content. It was the reminder that social innovators like Moyo are already doing the hard work. They're building solutions in contexts most of us will never fully understand, with resources that would make most corporate teams blanch. The question isn't whether they need the private sector. It's whether the private sector is willing to show up in ways that actually help.

The good news is that more and more CSR leaders are figuring this out. The momentum is real, and the examples are multiplying. If the conversations at ChangeNOW are any indication, 2026 might be the year we finally see corporate support for social innovation grow up.

At MovingWorlds, we work alongside teams at companies like Microsoft, EY, and SAP to help CSR leaders build programs that actually move the needle. If any of this resonates, we'd love to compare notes.