As the world evolves, socials issues change along with it and some even became more universal than others. Social entrepreneurships are set up with the purpose of finding the root causes and solving these social issues. These organisations would commit to social causes similar to non-profit organisations but also tread the waters of traditional profit oriented enterprises. Social entrepreneurships exists due to the changing nature of business environment today. This is because many profit based companies have now acknowledged their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as social issues become more prevalent in contemporary society. However, social enterprises falls in between profit and nonprofit organisations as they are able to generate profit for self sustainability and use its earnings to heavily address social issues as they emerge. Social issues that have become more mainstream in recent years are concerns such as women’s rights, child support, mental health and many others. There is no doubt that the hybrid that is social entrepreneurships have major impacts on these issues as they are able to implement societal change and create job opportunities.
Social entrepreneurship is relevant in contemporary society as it brings social awareness to many important issues. Awareness is brought by organising campaigns or spreading the word through various media. This would then be followed up with suitable steps to counter such problems with minimal contradictions (Schumpeter, 1934, as cited in Gawel, 2013). This is stated because profit oriented firms which participate in CSR, tend to have major contradictions. Examples include fuel companies that pollute the air would aid in water restoration. This brings about many criticism from the public, hence social entrepreneurs find innovative ways to counter it. Dees (2001) argued that social entrepreneurs play the role as change agents in the society as they continue to adapt and innovate to suit the situation at hand (as cited in Hao, 2011). Without the aid of social entrepreneurs, many issues around the world would not be as widespread as it is today.
Despite that, it is argued that social entrepreneurship is not as relevant as some might believe. This is stated because social entrepreneurs’ roles in bringing about societal change can be seens as redundant. Both profit based and nonprofit organisations are able to help solve the existing social issues. For instance, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), a non profit organisation that has been actively and successfully raising awareness about the crisis our modern world is facing environmentally (Harries, 2006). This shows that social entrepreneurships are not the only ones raising awareness and introducing innovative ways to curb the social issues at hand. Moreover, profit oriented firms are beginning to see the importance of addressing social concerns and many have since participated such as Microsoft and Ford. Multi-million dollar companies are able to contribute and achieve better results with their available resources on top of the credibility that they already possess. As stated by Burin and Lewis (2015) accountability and strategic management of social entrepreneurship would need to be built based on mutually beneficial modes of operation. Therefore, social entrepreneurship is not relevant in the contemporary context due to lack of credibility and redundancy.
Even so, many impacts would be resulted as social entrepreneurship is a rather new and untraversed concept. Such impacts being the innovation and services provided to both the needy and the average person. Social entrepreneurs have this ability to create new and interesting ways to benefit as many people as possible, primarily focusing on social issues (Tome, Meira, & Bandeira, 2015). These highly motivated individuals are able to make social change missions sustainable by having business models and donations to fund their ongoing operations (Dees, 2001, as cited in Hao, 2011). Dees (2001) also reported that when these talented individuals come together to creatively solve social issues with business-like methods, social enterprises are born (as cited in Hao, 2011). In the case of social entrepreneurs Ken and JJ Ramberg, an idea emerged to create a search engine that would be able to aid social causes. This resulted in the creation of GoodShop, an online social enterprise built to assist nonprofit organisations. This innovative idea brings a unique spin to the already new concept of social entrepreneurship as they focus more on driving money to nonprofits for wider impact through consumers instead of targeting just one of the many social issues themselves. GoodShop operates by allowing selling of coupons from partnered companies, then donating some of the proceeds to partnered social organisation of the person’s choice (GoodShop, n.d.). Thus, putting social responsibility in the hands of the consumers. This becomes a win-win situation for countless parties for example, partnered companies such as Expedia, nonprofits such as WWF, the unfortunate and the consumers. Their aim is to channel as much resources into nonprofits as possible as stated in their website that over $300 billion is spent on e-commerce annually in America alone (GoodShop, n.d.). Therefore, the impact provided by social entrepreneurships are the positive and innovative change they bring to the world.
Additionally, social entrepreneurship impacted the world by establishing countless job opportunities. Parallel to other business entity, social enterprises require a workforce in order to carry out its operations. Unlike nonprofits, social enterprises have the ability to distribute wages due to self sustainability (Nguyen, Szkudlarek, & Seymour, 2005). This would seem more appealing to many as they would be able to contribute to the needy while earning enough to put food on the table. For example, the GoodShop actively hires individuals from different professions such as software engineers to marketing managers (GoodShop, n.d.). As social entrepreneurship becomes more prevalent in society, universities have started courses that specify on this area of business (Hao, 2011). Not to mention, many social enterprises also target the younger generations as they have the passion and creative ability to address social issues in contemporary society (Comini et al, 2012, cited in Gonçalves, Carrara, & Schmittel, 2015). This is believed as people are becoming more aware and inclined to help those in need on top of having the ideas and resources that are available now such as the internet and technology. Hence allowing social entrepreneurships to provide significant impacts to social issues and the world at large.
On the other hand, it can also be argued that social entrepreneurship brings negative impacts to society. This would include the risk of contradictions that surrounds activities conducted by social enterprises. Many social enterprises have been accused for behaving similarly to traditional profit oriented companies such as focusing more on maximising profit rather than remaining loyal to their cause and clients (Dion, 2012). In turn, the credibility and accountability of the social enterprise would decrease and thus not be able to help those in need. Aside from behaving like profit focused companies, the actions of some social enterprises contradicts their missions. A momentous precedent is Comic Relief, a social enterprise that aims to uplift the spirits of sick children with campaigns such as the annual Red Nose Day, would invest in Tobacco, chemical and fire arms (Dorman, 2013). These contradictions are negative impacts as the donations and kindness of many has not been used to its maximum capacity to aid in the relief of social issues, forcing many supporters to lose their trust in social enterprises (Dion, 2012). Not living up to their missions would make society doubt the legitimacy and credibility of not just social enterprises but also companies that carry out CSR and even nonprofits. This is noted as social entrepreneurship is a hybrid and has many correlations with the two.
To conclude, social entrepreneurship is an amazing new concept in contemporary society. It stays relevant by bringing awareness about social issues as well as finding creative new ways to address them. Social entrepreneurship may be seen as redundant to some, but it’s ability to make an impact while remaining self sustainable is something to be commended. Likewise, the impacts include changing the way business is conducted by using business models to achieve social missions and also creating job opportunities. With that said, the future of social entrepreneurship looks bright, provided issues such as contradiction and controversy can be reduced to the minimum. This would allow for more trust in these noble causes by the general public and also potential investors so that social enterprises can go on to help as many people as possible.
(1320)
References
Burin A.D., & Lewis K.V. (2015). Traversing the Terrain of Context in Social Entrepreneurship. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, Volume 6 (Issue 2), 127-136. Retrived from http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/10.1080/19420676.2015.1038005
Dion, M. (2014). The economic and non-economic dimensions of social entreprises' moral discourse: An issue of axiological and philosophical coherence. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Volume 10 (Issue 2), 385-408. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/10.1007/s11365-012-0238-z
Dorman, N. (2013, August 10). Comic Relief invests millions in controversial tobacco, chemical and arms firms. Mirror. Retrieved from http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/comic-relief-invests-millions-controversial-2149614Gonçalves, C.P., Carrara, K. & Schmittel, R.M. (2016). The Phenomenon of Social Enterprises: Are We Keeping Watch on This Cultural Practice?. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Volume 27 (Issue 4), 1585–1610. doi:10.1007/s11266-015-9624-9
GoodShop. n.d. Shop. Save. Give. It's That Easy. Retrieved from https://www.goodsearch.com/about
Hao Jiao, (2011). A conceptual model for social entrepreneurship directed toward social impact on society. Social Enterprise Journal, Volume 7 (Issue: 2), 130-149. doi: 10.1108/17508611111156600
Harris, R. (2006). Wild Ambition. Marketing Magazine, Volume 111 (Issue 14), 13-16. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/ehost/detail/detail?sid=710fe587-9c43-49bf-ba72-620acfb6826c%40sessionmgr104&vid=0&hid=102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=bth&AN=20671680
Malin Gawell, (2013). Social entrepreneurship – innovative challengers or adjustable followers?. Social Enterprise Journal, Volume 9 (Issue: 2), 203-220. doi: 10.1108/SEJ-01-2013-0004
Nguyen, L., Szkudlarek, B., and Seymour, R. G. (2015). Social impact measurement in social enterprises: An interdependence perspective. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Volume 32 (Issue 4), 224–237. doi: 10.1002/cjas.1359.
Tomé, Maria Brízida Faria,de Sousa, Meira, D. A., & Bandeira, A. M. A. (2015). Integrated reporting and corporate social responsibility in the context of social economy (mutual associations in the health and welfare sector) CIRIEC - Espana, (Issue 85), 109-142. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/1771111951?accountid=12528
Comments