Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Title
Introduction
Although the term ‘Social Entrepreneurship’ is relatively new, evidence shows that
some great social entrepreneurs have always existed in the last two centuries.
Altruism coupled with business sense has paved way for new opportunities for those
who have entrepreneurial skills and want to work for the betterment of the society.
Extraordinary people like Muhammad Yunus (Nobel Peace prize winner in 2006)
came up with brilliant ideas and succeeded at creating revolutionary products and
services dramatically improving human lives (Youssry 2007). As opposed to
traditional non-profits, which are dependant on charitable donations and government
subsidies, social enterprises are increasingly self-sufficient and sustainable (Boschee
& McClurg 2003).
There are a number of definitions for Social Entrepreneurship at the moment giving
broad and narrow meanings to it. Whatever they are, the underlying truth is that
making a social impact is as important for social entrepreneurs as creating personal
and shareholder value, if not more (Austin, Stevenson and Wei Skillern 2006). Social
Entrepreneurship is definitely more than the business or economic entrepreneurship.
Unlike some commercial/economic organisations that only voice their social concerns
through their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) departments, social enterprises
treat their social and/or environmental responsibilities as the prime business cases.
The CSR initiatives can change with time and circumstances, and range from simply
organising donations by the employees to international social/voluntary projects
involving millions of pounds, depending on the interests and financial status of the
company. On the contrary, most social entrepreneurs get influenced by local
problems with which they have first-hand experiences and decide to stick to them for
a considerable time. They focus all of their resources and energies thinking about
and analysing the social issues and offer direct and often speedy solutions to the
people in need. Due to the stronger, quicker and more transparent impact the social
enterprises make on the society, there is an obligation to create and foster more and
more social entrepreneurs as compared to the CSR solutions from general
companies. Baron (2005) supports this by saying that corporate giving in the form of
social entrepreneurship is a better substitute to personal giving than that of profit-
maximising firms. Nonetheless, one should understand that both CSR and Social
Entrepreneurship are not mutually exclusive. They can go hand in hand for the sake
of a healthier society. If CSR is defined as “the business contribution to Sustainable
Development” (European Commission 2002), then the “individual entrepreneurs’
contribution to sustainable development” is Social Entrepreneurship (Seelos & Mair
2004).
However, many people still find it difficult to comprehend the marriage between
‘Social service’ and ‘Entrepreneurship’. It is yet to attract the required attention of the
academicians. There is confusion on who should teach this subject in universities. It
is lacking credibility as there is not enough research done on it.
Research Questions
Theoretical Framework
“(1) identifying a stable but inherently unjust equilibrium that causes the exclusion,
marginalization, or suffering of a segment of humanity that lacks the financial means
or political clout to achieve any transformative benefit on its own;
(3) forging a new, stable equilibrium that releases trapped potential or alleviates the
suffering of the targeted group, and through imitation and the creation of a stable
ecosystem around the new equilibrium ensuring a better future for the targeted group
and even society at large.”
Page 2 of 5
A large range of not-for-profit, for-profit and mixed ventures (that have both not-for-
profit and for-profit elements in them) come under the umbrella of Social
Entrepreneurship (Dees 1998 & Hockerts 2006). Dees (1998) says that social
entrepreneurs are a rare breed with unique skills and interests. There is a great need
to encourage these people and also spread the awareness, support and guidance in
this area to attract others. This has been the motivation behind “Ashoka”, founded by
Bill Drayton, also called as the ‘Father of Social Entrepreneurship’. In the UK, Lord
Young of Dartington, Michael Young was one of the pioneers in this area. He was
responsible for about forty social organisations including a school for Social
Entrepreneurs. History has seen several of such innovative thinkers in addition to
institutions such as the Schwab, the Skoll and the Draper Richards foundations that
clearly understood how just a person like Muhammad Yunus (founder of Grameen
bank) or Vinoba Bhave (founder of the Land Gift movement) can change millions of
lives with simple ideas. The question is whether there exists a common platform in
the form of literature or research to spread the best practices in social
entrepreneurship? If yes, how many budding social entrepreneurs can access and
emulate them?
There is still a vacuum in the literature, research and awareness about the factors
that lead to success in the field of Social Entrepreneurship (Alvord et al. 2004;
Cramer 2003; Desa and Kotha 2006; Mulgan 2006). Leadbeater (1997) and
Thompson (2002) stress in their publications the urgent need to foster social
entrepreneurs. Mair, Robinson and Hockerts (2006) expect more research to be
done in understanding how values, systems and processes can affect sustainability
of social enterprises.
Beneficiaries
Page 3 of 5
life cycle right from business idea to entrepreneur’s leave from the venture and
possibly equip the prospective social entrepreneurs with a technology tool kit
positively influencing their ventures. It will also contribute to the present ‘body of
knowledge’ of social entrepreneurship opening the doors to further research
opportunities in offering more practical solutions to budding social entrepreneurs.
Design/Methodology/Approach
In order to solve the research problems the data will be gathered by closely studying
the tools, techniques, processes and procedures adopted in successful social
ventures. It is suggested to carefully divide social enterprises based on pre-decided
criteria, choose a number of small to large successful enterprises in UK and India,
which fit in these categories, approach the founders & senior management and
conduct interviews with them. Wherever possible, surveys and questionnaires will be
used. Role of technology specifically the use of affordable information technology
tools in all the stages of the life cycle of these social businesses will be thoroughly
investigated.
It may not be feasible to analyse different types of varied businesses and derive a
clear set of established practices. Keeping this in view, it is expected to discuss the
findings based on the background, industry and type of the business. Quantitative
techniques are considered as well as there may be a need to combine both
quantitative and qualitative methods for more accurate analysis.
It is recommended to include only those ventures that are the brainchildren of one or
two entrepreneurs. In other words, institutional or co-operative social enterprises
(Spear 2006) will not be approached as the main goal behind conducting this
research is mainly to foster visionary social entrepreneurs.
References
Alvord S.H., L. David Brown & C.W. Letts. 2004. “Social Entrepreneurship and
Societal Transformation: an Exploratory Study.” Journal of Applied Behavioural
Science: 40: 260-282
Page 4 of 5
Dees, J.Gregory. 1998. The Meaning of “Social Entrepreneurship”.
Mair, J. & Martif, I. 2004. Social Entrepreneurship: What are we talking about? A
framework for future research. Working Paper 546. IESE Business school, University
of Navarra, Barcelona.
Martin, Roger L. & Osberg Sally. 2007. Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for
Definition.
Mulgan, G. 2006. Social Innovation, what it is, why it matters and how it can be
accelerated. London: The Young Foundation.
Pearce, J.M., Grafman, L., Colledge, T. & Legg, R. 2008. Leveraging Information
Technology, Social Entrepreneurship, and Global Collaboration for Just Sustainable
Development.
von Hippel, Eric. 2005. "Open source software projects as user innovation networks -
no manufacturer required." in Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software,
edited by J. Feller, B. Fitzgerald, S. Hissam, and K. Lakhani. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Page 5 of 5