Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (18)
Destacado
Destacado (15)
Similar a Senior resarch project.social entrpreneurship pp
Similar a Senior resarch project.social entrpreneurship pp (20)
Último
Último (20)
Senior resarch project.social entrpreneurship pp
- 1. Social Entrepreneurship CCEDL Senior Research Project by LeShelle A. Smith
- 2. Introduction Social entrepreneurship has the potential to have the greatest impact on poverty compared to every other failed attempt to address critical social issues. Social entrepreneurs are risk takers and problem solvers. Their ideas are notable and more importantly, their ideas are working.
- 3. Giving and Governing Has Got It Wrong
- 4. Charity Has Failed Charity is self seeking. Charity perpetuates poverty. Charity is susceptible to misuse. Charity is disempowering the people it is supposed to help. Charity fosters entitlement. Charity displaces workers.
- 6. Taking Social Entrepreneurship Seriously How is and entrepreneur? Why areasocial entrepreneur needed? Whatis a social Government have FAILED. • Charitysocialentrepreneursset apart from other social change makers? Valueidentify who can mobilize andas an opportunity, issues rather than An individual a problem or a deficit respond to social resolved the They Proposition: impact trends that • Abuse of power.motivateopportunity,financial to flinch Social face of commitment to pursue the the global and fail market. in the Value proposition sets “altruistic impulses form social entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs harnessapart entrepreneurs that have fueled charity in the • Dependency creation. opposition. The value placed on a impulses towards impact and performance.” past, but directs those new entitlement. • Re-enforcing attitudes of venture is important when exacting societal change if change is of mission compared • Disempowermentthe the aid recipient. to profit for a corporation, appeasingto maximize resources done when practicing charity, or seeking • Failure our consciences as is already present. to Failure to with government. • control as include the recipient as a stakeholder. • Debt creation. • This failure has created a need for SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURS.
- 8. Did You Know They Were Social Entrepreneurs?
- 9. Characteristics of a Social Entrepreneur
- 10. The Risk of Being a Social Entrepreneur
- 11. Links Between Social Entrepreneurship and Sustainable Societal Transformation
- 12. Social Entrepreneurship in Practice: Dr. Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Bank
- 13. Grammen Bank Social Business Model
- 15. Conclusion
- 16. Sources: Alvord, S. H., Brown, L., & Letts, C. W. (2004). Social Entrepreneurship and Societal Transformation. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(3), 260-282. Boxer, B. Sen. and Durbin, D. (2013, July 1).The Wrong Choice for Grameen Bank. HuffingtonPost. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com Colgan, A. (2002, April 18). Hazardous to Health: The World Bank and IMF in Africa. Retrieved from http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Urgent_Action/apic041802.html Dacin, M.T., Dacin, P.A. and Tracey, P. (2011) Social entrepreneurship: a critique and future directions. Organization Science, 22(5): 1203-1213 Dees, J. G., (2007). Taking social entrepreneurship seriously. Society. 44(3) 24-31 Driscoll D. (n.d.). The IMF and the World Bank: How Do They Differ? International Monetary Fund. Retrieved December 27, 2013, from www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exrp/differ/differ.htm Feinberg, R. (1988). The Changing Relationship Between the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. International Organization 42 (3): pp. 545-560 Karl Marx (2003). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mar Lupton, R. (2011). Toxic Charity: How Churches and Charities Hurt Those They Help (And How to Reverse It). New York: HarperCollins Martin, R. L., Osberg, S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 29-39 Palast, G. (28 April 2001). IMF's four steps to damnation. The Guardian. Retrieved December 27, 2013 from www.theguardian.com/business/2001/apr/29/business.mbas Schuyler, G. (1998). Social entrepreneurship: profit as a means, not an end. Digest, 98 (7), 97-98 Stiglitz, J. (2002). Responding to Economic Crises: Policy Alternatives for Equitable Recovery and Development. The Manchester School. 67 (5): 409-427 Stiglitz, J. (2004). Capital-market Liberalization, Globalization, and the IMF. Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 20 (1): 57-71 Sobhan, Z. (2014, February 1). The minister has a Hallmark moment. The Sunday Guardian. Retrieved from http://ww.sundayguardian.com Woods, N. (2001). Making the IMF and the World Bank More Accountable
Notas del editor
- Welcome to Social Entrepreneurship and Impact for Societal Transformation and I am LeShelle A. Smith
- This presentation will define social entrepreneurship; detailing the characteristics and types of social entrepreneurs. A detailedassessment as to why charitable organizations and government agencies have failed will be addressed.Risks and challenges social entrepreneurs face will be discussed. A business model of a successful social entrepreneur endeavor, The Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, will also be presented. Examples of successful social entrepreneurs and their ventures will be provided.And finally, future directives for social entrepreneurship will also be offered. Ultimately, this presentation serves to persuadephilanthropists, global financial leaders, and social stakeholders to take the prospect of social entrepreneurship seriously in the face of failed attempts by traditional means.
- Poverty, a lack of resources, is a stand-alone social issue that has become an incubator for more social issues. Today – If we have Charity. And live in an age where world leaders can network.Why do we still have sex trafficking, child labors, access to education that is unaffordable, an deteriorating environment, gender inequality, unemployment, in a world were people are starving.These social issues are inadequately being confronted by charitable organizations and government institutions. The system is broken.Charitable organizations and Government agencies are inadequate because they only offer short term solutions.The challenges of finding effective and sustainable solutions require social entrepreneurs.Social Entrepreneurs combine business and innovation that fundamentally transformations political, economic, and social systems.Let’s take at a deeper look at what is not working.
- Almost 90% of American adults are involved personally or financially with a cause or a charity. That is a tremendous amountof giving with very minimal results to show for it.Charity usually comes in the form of assistance from religious institutions and that is where the failure begins.Charity has failed because it is self seeking in many cases.Charity “appeases our consciences.” In his research Duke University Professor J. Gregory Dees found that “Charity only perpetuates poverty by taking the initiative away from the poor. Charity allows us to go ahead with our own lives with worrying about those of the poor”.Charity is also very susceptible to misuse.In his book, Toxic Charity, author Robert D. Lupton, researched and found 85% of the charitable money being giving to support African countries never reaches the designated area where the poorest live. Charity fails when it disempowers recipients of good will. Turning able bodied individuals into beggars.Charity fails when is fosters an attitude of entitlement. Charity fails when work opportunities for local men and women are given to volunteers from mission trips.
- Social issues became a shared responsibility during the Enlightened Period by the thought leaders and philosophers of that time. The idea suggested that while government was focused on economic development, the people suffered. Time had come for the government the share with the church the duty of assisting the people with their basic needs. They needed each other to serve the people.Soon followed the philosophy of communist Karl Marx who spoke and wrote on the subjects of social sciencesand political philosophy appeared.In one is his writings, Marx stated, “Liberal rights and ideas of justice are premised on the idea that each of us needs protection from other human beings. Therefore liberal rights are rights of separation, designed to protect us from such perceived threats. Freedom on such a view is freedom from interference. What this view overlooks is the possibility that real freedom is to be found positively in our relations with other people.”There soon was a shift in thinking that led to a shift in government policy. Though the health of a society depends on community and relationships, freedoms and liberties allow a man to protect himself and his interests when he feels threatened.Combine perceived threats with the liberty of those in authority to use classism and power to establish global laws that impede nations from trading raw goods on the open market; people soon become separate from one another and cut off from resources that will enable them from ever escaping poverty. Government alone is not the solution to addressing social issues.Government fails when laws are created to marginalize a people. For example, the international loans made by the International Monetary Fund and the World bank provided to poor nations creates more debt. Underdeveloped nations must siphon off its few assets such as utility and water rights to repay already wealthy nations. When multinational corporations seize these assets, they increase the fees to prices the citizens cannot afford.The stipulations for IMF/World Bank loans are unrealistic. For example, liberalizing the market of an underdeveloped nation means flooding the market with goods which lowers the price of goods which decreased profits for manufactures, farmers, and shippers. Joseph Stiglitz,former chief economist at the World Bank “Government policy-makers must make important decisions in less than ideal circumstances. If they make the wrong decision, the country can collapse. If they make the right decision, hardly anyone notices. These decisions are made in a highly uncertain environment. They must recognize this uncertainty, recognize the asymmetries, and recognize the long-lasting effects of possible mistake.” (Stiglitz, 2002).The IMF and the World Bank are two prime examples of why government has failed for many of the same reasons charity has failed: abuse of power, dependency creation, disempowering the beneficiary of the aid, failure to maximize resources already present, and failure to include the recipients as stakeholders. In the case of nations who accept loans form the World Bank, debt is created opposite the goal of becoming debt free.
- To review: the reasons charity and government have failed to effectively address social issues areThe abuse of power, dependency creation, re-enforcing attitudes of entitlement, the disempowerment the aid recipient, failure to maximize resources already present, and failure to include the recipient as a stakeholder. In the case of nations who accept loans form the World Bank, debt is created opposite the goal of becoming debt free. The challenges of finding effectivesolutions to societies problemsrequire social entrepreneurs.Social Entrepreneurs combine business and innovation that fundamentally transformations political, economic, and social systems.So………………………what exactly is a social entrepreneur?The definition of a social entrepreneur is an individual who can mobilize and respond to social issues rather than impact trends that motivate the global financial market. Social Entrepreneurs harness “altruistic impulses that have fueled charity in the past, but directs those impulses towards impact and performance.”Why do we need social entrepreneurs?They identify a problem or a deficit as an opportunity, resolved the commitment to pursue the opportunity, and fail to flinch in the face of opposition. What is there distinction from other others who are creating social change?Value proposition sets apart entrepreneurs form social entrepreneurs. The value placed on a new venture is important when exacting societal change if change is the mission compared to profit for a corporation, appeasing our consciences as is done when practicing charity, or seeking to control as with government.
- Value proposition sets apart social entrepreneurs from others who are addressing social change. The value placed on a new venture is important when exacting societal change because change is the mission. At the beginning of the entrepreneurs endeavor, he or she and their investors have decided that seeing a profit is the end means being sought. The traditional entrepreneur “anticipates and is organized to serve markets that can comfortably afford the new product or service, and is thus designed to create financial profit” (Martin and Osberg, 2007). The social entrepreneur’s value proposition targets an underserved, neglected, or highly disadvantaged population that lacks the financial means or political clout to achieve the transformative benefit on its own”(Martin and Osberg, 2007).
- Florence Nightingale’s family believed her education suited her for more than servitude as a nurse. She chose to not only become a nurse but fought to improve hospital conditions during the Crimean War. She eventually went on to establish the first school for nursing, bring respect to the profession, and is now considered the founder of modern nursing. She changed society. The City Beautiful Movement was driven by Frederick Law Olmstead. In the late nineteenth century, Olmstead envisioned cities as open spaces and not just epicenters of economic convergence. He is credited as being the founder of landscape architecture forever combining environment and architecture. Olmsted created Central Park in New York City, Rock Creek Park in Washington D.C., and Boston’s Emerald Necklace. Frederick Law Olmstead changed society. The desktop shattered the mainframe, when Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak strove to make working on a computer more efficient. The software program this team designed revolutionized the technology industry forever. User friendliness was the social goal -beyond shareholder’s interests and capitalism. They indefinitely changed society. Occupy Wall Street is a “leaderless” movement that forced society to revisit the reality of income inequality. Some question the continuation of the movement but the fight to increase minimum wage, the urge for a more transparent government, and spike in the number of charitable risk takers kick-starting and crowd-rising since Occupy Wall Street began cannot not be denied or ignored. The conversation of equal access to opportunity has begun. Occupy Wall Street changed society.
- Social entrepreneurs are not limited by personal resources or the lack there of. Social entrepreneurs are specifically skilled to do more with less and are not bound by traditional financing. Risks are calculated in the knowledge of scarce resources. Social entrepreneurs seek partnerships and collaborations to leverage existing funds. Ultimately the risk in shared among stake holders (Dees, 1998).Trivoli and Stokols (2011) have found, “that there has been a paradigm shift away from the notion of a social sector that merely receives funds from charitable organizations, towards a notion of earned investment through collaborations and partnerships.”
- 50% of small businesses fail in the first five years according to the U.S. Small Business Administration. Social entrepreneurs experience the same barriers as traditional entrepreneurs. Breaking new ground and experimentation is required.Outcomes can be unpredictable. Weak outcomes jeopardize future funding to further the mission.Ethical safeguards must be in place to arrest the ego.
- Transformation is done by widening the impact of a social entrepreneurial venture. Transformation has taken place when:Coverage has been expanded to provide services and benefits to more peopleFunctions and services have been expanded to provide broader impacts to primary stakeholdersActivities that change the behavior of actors with wide impacts or the act of scaling up impact have taken place. (Sarah Alvord of Harvard et. al., 2004 and Univ et. al. 2000) Alvord (et. al. 2004) found that transformation is directly linked to innovation; no so with government policy or charitable giving. What each of these organizations has in common is the ability to build local capacity by working with the poor and marginalized populations to identify the needs for self-help to build such capacities. Each organization also first developed a combination of services and functions that enhanced village or group capabilities for self-help then leveraged existing resources to expand services to cover many client groups (Alvord et. al. 2004).
- Dr. Muhammad Yunus and the Grameen Banks is an example of a successful social entrepreneur venture that has produced long-term measurable results and supports the theory that social entrepreneurship has the potential to have the greatest impact on the social issue of poverty compared to every other failed attempt to address this critical issue. It was authorized by national legislation as an independent bank in 1983. Dr. Yunus is recognized as the father of microcredit.Issues loans without any collateral at low interest rates to the absolute poor they can establish small businesses.The first loan was in the amount of $27 to 42 women in the Jobra village. Each repaid their loans and fond they could become industrious with a small investment to purchase something slight such as a sewing machine. With the ability to create garments for sale, these women were able to elevate themselves out of poverty.
- “A Grameen type credit program opens up the door for limitless self-employment, and it can effectively do it in a pocket of poverty amidst prosperity, or in a massive poverty situation” (Yunus 1989).There are 5 key elements to the Grameen Bank Social Business Model:Challenging conventional thinking.Finding complementary partners.Undertaking continuous experimentation.Recruiting social profit oriented shareholders.Specify social profit objectives clearly and early.“It is a no-loss, no-dividend, self-sustaining company that sells goods and services and repays investments to its owners, but whose primary purpose is to serve society and improve the lot of the poor” (Yunus, 2010).
- First, the future of social entrepreneurship will require legitimacy. “Legitimacy is likely a critical resource needed for the success of these social ventures” (Dart, 2004). Strategically build networks and establish a framework for how those networks are created, maintained, and leveraged.To gain legitimacy within influential networks, creating the social entrepreneurial narrative. Persuasive narrator, David Bornstein understands the importance of being someone who “tells the stories of people who have changed their lives and found ways to change the world” (Bornstein 2004). Branding defines what the social entrepreneur is offering and how it differentiates itself from charity and government initiativesAll four areas of concentration complement one another to support the future of social entrepreneurs around the world in the pursuit of what social entrepreneurs need most - funding. Dees (2007) stated that support for social entrepreneurs is more dependent upon “sentiment, popular causes, personal charisma, and marketing skills” than social value creation. Funding allows for more experimentation to properly select the most effect innovations, extract failures, and learn from them (Dees 2007).
- Of the three institutions acting as change agents who are taking steps to empower women, advocating for the homeless, or organizing voters to fight against corrupt governments and regimes, the social entrepreneurs have the ability to make the greatest impact. Value propositionbrought financial support that can be reinvested back into the social entrepreneurial endeavor and leveraged in ways no charitable organization or government agency can replicate. because the process includes the people being impacted by the social issue. The beneficiaries are not shareholders, or voters, or service recipients. The beneficiaries are stakeholders involved at every level of changing their circumstances. Charity and governance has shown too many times to be inefficient, ineffective, and unresponsive in the face of social issues.To effectively make change that is sustainable, innovation, risk-taking, creativity, and has the fortitude to create social improvement where social issues exist, social entrepreneurship is the concept to accept.