Defining Social Entrepreneurship

There are three definitions posted on these sites:

1. Social entrepreneurship is any enterprise that "creates employment & opportunity where it’s needed is a social entrepreneur,"

2. Social entrepreneurship is "the use of business to achieve social as well as financial gain," and

3. Social entrepreneurship is using "entrepreneurial principles to organize, create, and manage a venture" addressing a social problem.

Incidentally, I think these three conflicting definitions embody the central disagreement about the definition of SE. I picture a continuum with social objectives on the left side and monetary objectives on the right side. The first definition is on the far right, the second in the middle, and the third on the far left.

Regarding the first definition, I agree that generating profit and employment in a needy community has intrinisic social benefit, but I think we need a more rigorous definition of social entrepreneurship.

Recently Jessica, Martha and I went to a young professionals' mixer for Endeavor, an organization that invests in small and medium enterprises in developing countries. An Endeavor business-owner spoke about his video game company in Buenos Aires. I would not call this social enterprise. Martha, Jessica and I talked to the business-owner after his speech, and he agreed. That's not to say that creating white-collar jobs for educated computer technicians in a middle-income global city is not a worthy investment. But I don't think that any employment generation in any needy community qualifies as social entrepreneurship.

On to number two. For some SE ventures, generating profit goes hand in hand with maximizing social good--especially those that require so much capital that investors want returns. The example of the Christie Company's Africa Integras Fund, launched to create "university cities" in Africa that provide affordable housing, education, and basic human services comes to mind. But some ventures face a clear trade off between social good and financial gain, and in these cases a SE venture may rightly choose to forgo profit (or reinvest all profits into a partner non-profit, as Housing Works does). Our definition of SE, therefore, shouldn't demand that profit be generated.

I think the third definition comes closest--addressing a social problem using a model attentive to principles traditionally exclusive to business (e.g. efficiency, innovation, smart marketing).

However, isn't this just a modified definition of a non-profit/NGO, expanded to also include enterprises that derive profit, and reflective of long-standing complaints about that sector (inefficiency, mission drift, etc.)? Is it too inclusive, failing to push us to imagine better solutions to social problems?

dfasfasdfas

There is noticeably a bundle to learn about this. I assume you made sure nice points in features also.

Social entrepreneurship is a major area of interest in many social and civic organizations and has a significant impact on many areas of society.There is a growing new trend among business enterprises. A lot of companies are leaning towards being more socially responsible.

I also agree with it. But from Wikipedia it is only social achiever.

Here is the Wikipedia definition

A social entrepreneur recognizes a social problem and uses entrepreneurial principles to organize create and manage a venture to achieve social change.

SEO Services New York