Reshaping Social Entrepreneurship [Paul C. Light] - Response

            Paul Light argues that the definition of social entrepreneurship is “Too Tight for its Own Good.” Why is there such a deep focus on the traits of the single entrepreneur? He states that by widening the field, we can expand the support and impact of the work that social entrepreneurs do. This may be true, but go too wide, and some may miss the mark.

            The problems Light defines in the article of the current definition include neglect of the group or organization and the larger support system around which an entrepreneur may benefit. Neglecting the group is not the issue, however, the term “social entrepreneur” clearly alludes to an individual in contrast to a group of people. The individual’s pursuit is the compelling part of the story that may actually increase visibility for the mission rather than keep it in obscurity. Light hopes that “instead of one entrepreneur in a million, there may be one in a hundred or one in five,” suggesting that anybody could be a social entrepreneur, but I believe the entrepreneur is meant describe someone who seems to defy all odds to achieve change.

            Light says, “the most compelling research on business entrepreneurship suggests that successful change requires a stream of capabilities including leadership, management, marketing, organizational design, and finance.” Real momentum involves utilization of these skills. Yet groups and organization have many individuals, each with different personalities who may or may not be as motivated to spawn change and carry great accountability for the potential of failure as the person next to him. An individual may have many people around him who help move his vision forward, but he knows how to bring opportunity and action together.

            Although social entrepreneurs deserved great deal more visibility for their work, they are extraordinary because they are few in numbers. By reshaping the definition to one that encompasses a much larger group that is involved in work related to the social sector, we lose sight of what has been achieved by the individual and the obstacles they faced. Give the social entrepreneur the integrity he or she deserves.

Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition [Roger L. Martin & Sally Osberg] - Response

            The definition of social entrepreneurship, according to Martin and Osberg, is the sum of a process an individual takes towards sustained social change that is then scaled to create a greater impact on a global level. It is someone who sees opportunities for better solutions and creatively breaks the box to make the change happen. There is a tight focus on being able to reset the current equilibrium, which I believe is a strong argument for who represents an entrepreneur.

            Many people point to traits that an entrepreneur have as his or her defining gift to society. It may seem as though much of this definition is trait-driven, because Martin and Osberg mention that “inspiration, creativity, direction action, courage, and fortitude” are why stones can be set in motion. But they are not the what, only the how – how they are able to risk it all and face failure so frequently. Anyone can be resourceful, opportunistic, brave and innovative, but if they do not act on it, how can they be social entrepreneurs?

           If the definition were expanded to include every individual who wanted to spread awareness of a social cause, it would be difficult to pinpoint the people that are making the giant leaps to accomplish their mission. But I do not think that those who are struggling to gain momentum for a found opportunity should be barred from being recognized as social entrepreneurs. If someone is “identifying an opportunity in this unjust equilibrium, developing a social value proposition, and bringing to bear inspiration, creativity…” they are actively trying to alter a system and may already be creating a movement through their work. The writers make sure to bring up Victoria Hale, creator of Institute for OneWorld Health, “the first nonprofit pharmaceutical company whose mission is to ensure that drugs targeting infectious diseases in the developing world get to people who need them, regardless of their ability to pay for the drugs” as one such social entrepreneur. The creation of the new, higher equilibrium only cements the person's role as a social entrepreneur.

            The definition Martin and Osberg provided may seem too process-driven to some, but social entrepreneurship should be taken seriously as the individuals who find social objectives for their work and pour so much of themselves into it must to be distinguished from those who do not show sustained efforts towards their cause and grow their ideas. The words “Sustainability” and “Design Thinking” are already at risk of being thrown around with too little meaning. Let us make sure the meaning of  “social entrepreneurship” is not.

The Meaning of "Social Entrepreneurship" [J. Gregory Dees] - Response

The creative process is not always defined as a part of what makes a social entrepreneur who he or she is. Some writers in this field ignore or mention it only indirectly. However, Dees recognizes it as an important trait that allows entrepreneurs to continue their groundbreaking work when challenges arise.

Dees says, “entrepreneurs are innovative. They break new ground, develop new models, and pioneer new approaches.” This is the essence of the social entrepreneur. He or she can be relentless in pursuing opportunities, but without innovation, he or she is stuck. The process by which the status quo is altered in sped up through continuous learning, seeing different perspectives, and appending one's knowledge, which includes being “creative in applying what others have invented. Their innovations may appear in how they structure their core programs or in how they assemble the resources and fund their world.” It’s possible that entrepreneurs may hone what is already there but not yet at the front of the global stage.

As a result of their creativity, entrepreneurs can see different possibilities and routes in which to take in their line of work. There is much they will not know about, so they must understand that not everything may work as planned. They “tend to have a high tolerance for ambiguity and learn how to manage risks for themselves and others. They treat failure of a project as a learning experience, not a personal tragedy.” Creativity suggests flexible, which makes sense as the entrepreneur must constantly face great risk of failure.

It’s imperative the social entrepreneurs are creative, as well as incredibly driven people. Working to solve problems in different ways rather than ignoring them is perhaps why they have the persistence to eventually bring their solutions to mass-market adoption. Social or not, the entrepreneur must know how to think creatively.

Design for Social Entrepreneurship

About this class:

DeSE is focused on creating innovative new materials from rice straw, bagasse, sugarcane waste and rice hulls as a way to help EARTH University in Costa Rica better use their agricultural waste materials. By upcycling these materials into potential products or base materials from which products can be made, we are turning "waste" into productive goods that benefit the university environmentally and economically.

Agricultural Waste Materials:

Rice Hull

Rice Straw

Sugarcane waste

Fine sugarcane waste (bagasse)

About me:

This will be my first real plunge into social entrepreneurship. I took the Babson-Olin-RISD Product Design and Development course last fall. While we examined a few case studies on business models of social entrepreneurship, we didn't get to learn about the actual ways in which people go about doing it.

I’m currently working on earning a HPSS (History, Philosophy, Social Sciences) concentration in Environmental Studies. It’s something I care deeply about. I have taken as many courses on sustainability as possible while at RISD and would like to encourage a student group on campus to work on RISD’s progress in that area.

I enjoy sketching and rendering concepts, especially digitally. I also really like using two-dimensional graphics to communicate ideas. I would like to work on building better problem-solving skills, as well as, creating better, sustained flows of communication and understanding within a group. I think it’s really important to work as a group, even though I sometimes feel objectives can be reached faster alone. Teams where everyone mutually works off of each other’s strengths can be great to work in.

I’m most interested in working with people and culture. I love learning new cultures and understanding different ways of life. I think differences are just as interesting as similarities, if not more so.

Although I don't have previous social entrepreneurial experience, I’m hoping that I will be able to design for a social or environmental cause in the future.