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.
No comments:
Post a Comment