The "Betterment" Corporate Structure

I first read the concept of "Betterment" as it relates to business from Umair Hague of Harvard.  I am follower of his thoughts on how to run a 21st century enterprise that matters.

As I ramp up the release of Next2.Us in Africa, I am trying to figure out how best to structure relationship(s) with marketing partners.  There are few things more important to a start-up then agreements that directly impact the success of the business.

I'd like to structure the agreements in such a way that the goals of Next2.us are aligned with the goals of local supporters and project managers.   I want to:

1. Push decision making to local partners that presumably know, and understand, the needs of their fellow (also local to them) software users.
2. Empower local partners to feel that they have a significant stake in the success of the business.  
3. Reward local partners for that success.
4.  Be fair in valuing the contribution of local efforts against other local efforts as well as against efforts of Next 2
5. Rise-up  good local decision making and share it with other locals. 
6. Nurture  and rise-up good local programming code that enhances the use of Next 2

Building a business is about building value.  Value can be built through a number of mechanisms.  It may be in the people you hire, the code your write, or your company's, or product's presence, in one, or more, particular markets.  When working with partners you want to drive value both up and down the chain.  Unless all parties to an agreement feel it is in their best interest to pursue the goals of the agreement, the specifics of the agreement, are immaterial, if you can't get people to act on, and pursue, the agreement objectives.

What is driving all this . . . If an investor, individual, or company wants to purchase Next 2 they should be able to purchase everything; including local partners.

I think this is going to be important to the short and long term success of the business.  If Next2 is ever going to raise outside funds it is important that the relationship between Next2 and local partners be precisely understood, and wherever possible, be interlocking so success of each is tied to success of the other.  There needs to be a way to control the destiny of the entire organization to provide an exit in case an entity wants to purchase any or ALL of Next2. The key is how do you value local partners as it relate to the purchase of Next 2?

When structuring local partnerships my current thinking is to organize Next 2 by country. This makes sense because;

1. Next 2 software is itself focused on place organizing people, organizations and topics around place.
2. Allocation of sms short codes are organized by country.
3. Integration with 2-way sms gateways that uses short codes are done by country.
4. Tracking of marketing cost, registration and income can be done by activity as it relates to use of a specific short code and API.

If I organize the marketing of Next 2 on country-by-country basis then it follows to;

1. Establish a corporate entity in each country.
2. Next 2 and local partners would each own equity in new company.
3. Company would have its own bank account.
4. Revenue and income would be paid into company bank account.
5. Income to company Next2 and local partners would then be paid out of company bank account.

 This sort of structure also allows for;

1. Local revenue to stay in country of origin.
2. Possible way to reward local customers.
3. Mechanism to track "profitability" and "performance" of one country to another
4. Mechanism by which local Next2 may earn equity ownership in Next 2.

So how do I build a corporate structure that will align interest of Next2 with local "hereos?"  Does a western concept of a for-profit, limited liability corporation (corp LLC) founded in the State of Delaware in the United States really make sense for operating a software business whose potential customers are primarily in Africa (or other developing country)?  

I was hoping to discover some sort of hybrid structure somewhere between a corporation with limited liability and a membership cooperative where employees, customers or suppliers own the company, or a significant part of the company.  A cooperative type structure would allow for broad local participation (even to the customer level) and shared decision making but may be a hindrance when it comes to a sale.

From Umair Haque's most recent blog about role of "social media tools" -- It means thinking more carefully how to utilize those tools to get a tiny bit (or a heckuva lot) more significant, and starting to mean something in enduring terms. The deepest test of a 21st century business isn't just whether it glitters, but whether it can create thick value, that endures, benefits, and multiplies: whether it matters.