First of all he delves into the definition of the word "Entrepreneur" and describes it as a person who creates value and who is the catalyst and innovator behind economic progress.
The goal of a social entrepreneur differs from that of a business entrepreneur is that wealth is just a means to an end. Creating and sustaining social value, reducing needs rather than just meeting them and creating lasting improvements are all goals of social entrepreneurship.
I agree with the way the author described social entrepreneurship and really enjoyed the ways in which he laid out the basic goals and differences of business and social entrepreneurs. It really helped clarify and make sense of this topic that I knew very little about before today.
________________________________________________
The article "Reshaping Social Entrepreneurship" dealt with assumptions regarding ideas of who run these organizations, how they work, and why they exist. The author claims that because most of these social entrepreneurs are seen as individuals rather than teams and organizations, thousands of other groups and organizations are failing to achieve success because they're forced to work in their shadows.
When Sloan gave his presentation about this class he had a slide which showed the faces of individuals who were the figureheads for important and highly successful organizations. These organizations are identified by their individual visionary. The author of the article argues that the success of social entrepreneurs should not rely on one person but on an organization's ability to activate the public, raise capital, negotiate results, etc.
Because of these individuals, other groups who may not have the means of marketing themselves are being suffocated by these larger than life organizations who are limiting the potential of future social entrepreneurs. The difficulty for these unknown organizations is that because many of them are completely new to the game they do not have the name recognition or status that a big wig entrepreneur has and makes it hard for other groups to coexist. These groups are left hoping some investor is risky enough to invest in a virtual unknown and hope that they made the right choice. The solution is to move away from who becomes the entrepreneur and more towards what it is that the group seeks. The issue at hand should be more important than the individual behind it.
________________________________________________
The article "Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for a Definition" was a great article which was basically a much more in depth example of the first article. In this piece, the author mentions the different types of people who fall under the umbrella or social engagement.
He describes three groups: Social Entrepreneurs, Social Activists and Social Service Providers and how they all differed from each other. Social Entrepreneurs exist to bring radical change to stable but unjust equilibriums. Social Activists indirectly attempt to change these unbalanced situations and Social Service Providers seek to maintain and improve the existing model.
These groups are well defined and the author suggests that people are not limited to one group or the other, hybrid approaches exist. All of these groups have the same goal of seeking a transformational benefit that affects a significant segment of society or society at large. The examples of famous entrepreneurs helped get me understand what trials and tribulations social entrepreneur endure before and progress is made. The social entrepreneur is left wondering if their contribution makes any affect because most tend to be long-term endeavors.
