We’ve been ruminating lately on something that may ruffle a few feathers. It’s about the definition of social entrepreneur. Traditionally, an entrepreneur (the “mainstream” species) is a person who runs an enterprise or a venture. She is an ambitious leader, likely the founder, who is held accountable for the risks and outcomes of the operation. She is the face, the talking head, the company personified.
Did you notice anything in the description above? Other than the fact that we chose to use she instead of he, what’s interesting is that we think of an entrepreneur as the proverbial “King – or Queen – of the Mountain.” Go it alone. Winner takes all.
Somehow, it seems strange to apply this logic to social entrepreneurs and social enterprises. From what we see, social enterprise, as a sector, is unique: its focus is on the change that an enterprise creates. How a community is transformed. How the environment benefits. You get the drift.
Of course, social entrepreneurs are part of the cult of respect. Some would argue that only certain kinds of (often unreasonable) people are capable of being successful social entrepreneurs. They are driven, passionate, and possess a “don’t quit” attitude. (Harvard, at their Entrepreneurial Finance Lab, is even pioneering the use of psychometric testing to measure people’s natural predisposition to entrepreneurship. Results pending — look for more information in a future issue of Beyond Profit).
We agree, social entrepreneurs are unique. And amazing. But, what about the crew that supports the enterprise, and augments the work of the entrepreneur? If we are not all born with the “right” combination of enterprising traits, should we throw in the towel? More importantly, where do the employees of a social enterprise fit on the scale of entrepreneurial abilities?
From our experience at Beyond Profit, we know that employees of a social enterprise feel a strong sense of ownership over their enterprise, of their enterprise’s mission, of their work. Often, since many social enterprises are in start-up phase, all team members are forced to be entrepreneurial in both their thinking and in their actions. So then, don’t we all have the capability to be socially entrepreneurial? Can we call ourselves social entrepreneurs even if we aren’t the president/founder/supreme leader? Why do we need to draw a line in the sand?
We would love to hear your thoughts!
Mark Waterfield Said,
September 1, 2009 @ 2:02 pm
You are quite correct with your view that in start up enterprises all team members are forced to be entrepreneurial in their thinking and their actions.
I most certainly do not think that you need to be Head honcho to be a social entrepreneur.
Jeff Mowatt Said,
September 1, 2009 @ 2:33 pm
The business model and pioneering efforts of P-CED are very much the achievement of our founder,who put the concept of a business focussed on a primary social outcome first in a white paper, and then free to use on the web 12 years ago.
http://www.p-ced.com/about/background/
He’s never referred to himself as a social entrepreneur, neither would I. We operate as a people-centered business, which as the name suggests, has the objective of serving people. Like any business, it depends on the individual talents of each participant to function.
As a “profit for social purpose” business, our own definition, we fit within the general classification of a social enterprise as defined by UK government, although the model goes beyond this to include the fundamental ethical predicate that people are not disposable.
Rachel Said,
September 2, 2009 @ 4:31 am
The energy of the social enterpreneur is a unique thing. Different to the average business development driver, this entrepreneur is always aware of social mission and balance sheet and their focus is 100% in moving people to deliver against both. It is a unique viewpoint, strength and understanding of what can be achieved through business and as an employee under someone with this unique viewpoint, I can only say it is an inspiration to work towards his vision.
Richard Litchfield is a social enterpreneur extraordinaire and has designed and implemented products and programmes that are innovative and impactful. Eastside is an organisation with an enterpreneur who plays to the head honcho status but his purpose makes this drive essential.
Thanks for the article
Rachel
Eastside Consulting; making social enterprise happen
Bob Stilger Said,
September 2, 2009 @ 3:08 pm
This is a rich topic for me.
First off, I’m one of the thousands of people who simultaneously invented the term social entrepreneur back in the seventies. I think many of us came to this description because we saw that we were using the same creativity, initiative and bootstrap energy that was getting noticed in the mainstream economy. It gave us a way of explaining our pioneering efforts. We didn’t anticipate the unintended consequences of use of this term which including appropriating a whole set of values, norms, structures and principles which don’t necessarily fit very well.
I am increasingly dubious about use of the term “social entrepreneur.” I think it is used indiscriminately and doesn’t really provide much guidance in terms of working from that sweet spot of where my passion meets the world’s needs.
The second comment I would make starts with substituting the word leadership for social entrepreneur. At Berkana we believe effective leadership is always both an individual and a community phenomena. We say a leader is anyone who wants to help and that leadership is abundant, not scarce. We need to create the conditions for leaderful communities to emerge.
Those who think of themselves as social entrepreneurs who are doing it on their own either quickly burn out or sink into a lament about how they can’t get others to assume leadership. This is because of the way they hold their own leadership and consciously and unconsciously always pull the spotlight to themselves rather than to others. To be sure, catalysts and visionaries are critical in getting anything done. But we should recognize that life is a dance or big moments and smaller ones. We need the space for each of us to step forward with our vision and for each of us to catalyze action. We need conditions which build communities of support and of action.
You can see some of our work at http://www.berkana.org and some of mine at my new website (very much beginning stages) http://www.resilientcommunities.org.
Bharat Bongu Said,
September 8, 2009 @ 9:58 am
Hi I am Bharat Bongu,I am part of a 4 member team at SourcePilani, A Village based BPO in Rajasthan, India. I strongly believe that for a social organization to do well its very important that its management team members are highly motivated and are ready to face any challenges that come their way. Having the same sort of commitment from all the team members is quite essential. I think Adrienne has quite correctly mentioned the same.
Regards
Bharat
Do visit our website to know more : http://www.sourcepilani.com or email to info[at]sourcepilani.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRGnDjaxGLg (watch our video on Youtube)
Justice Hounnou Said,
September 23, 2009 @ 10:01 am
well, this is a debatable issue but if u ask me i will say that yes u need not be the head to be an entrepreneur and the fact also that you are working as part of such team does not neccesarily make u one. i believe there are some who are born entrepreneurs and others also learn to become one.it takes a disciplined person to adhere strictly to his or her own principles and set goals and standards aiming at a definate result in the near future.
An Interesting Little Tidbit Said,
October 21, 2009 @ 6:53 am
[...] short while ago, Beyond Profit published a piece entitled Can You Be A Social Entrepreneur If You’re Not the Head Honcho? This prompted further reflection and research from Sarah Jefferson of Ashoka Peace. She concludes [...]