If any of you are going to be at the Shine Unconference, I'll see you there. I'm hosting a session with my good friend Tom Bulman of Countec (the EBP for Milton Keynes) about setting up a School for Social Entrepreneurs for Young People NEET (Not in Employment, Education or Training, if you haven't heard that particular piece of government speak). I'm tempted to use the working title SNEEZE - School for NEET Social Entrepreneurs, with a Z replacing TS - but I don't think Tom likes it much.

Anyway, we're in the lobby, apparently. Not sure what this will actually be like, but we're imagining we'll have to do a bit of a barrow boy act to grab people as they arrive/leave: "Two pound a pound now, yer young social entrepreneurs..."

The real issues are: (i) will young people NEET really sign up to it? (ii) how different does the learning programme need to be from the adult SSE? (iii) can we find appropriate teachers/learning facilitators? (iv) who'll pay for it long term? (wrapped up in this is the question of how you define success) and (v) what should it be called (assuming we don't go with SNEEZE!)?

The last point may sound trivial, but Michael Young was a stickler for getting it right. We spent a year considering 'School for Social Entrepreneurs' before ending up back where we started, having tried multiple variants of each word, including the 'for': Academy of Social Innovation; Institute for Community Enterprise... The point is it makes a difference to how people see it. Later, as Director of SSE, the fact that we had chosen the name carefully and deliberately helped me sift through the various strategic options. That choice has become increasingly important, given the rapid, government-assisted growth of the social enterprise movement. I'm glad we chose entrepreneur not enterprise, because it really is all about the people.