• Discuss the differences between the social entrepreneurship theories discussed in the course.
• Explain how these theories link to social performance.
• Enumerate which variables impact the social performance of social enterprises
• Apply these theories to the analysis of social entrepreneurship in a wide range of case studies.

The domain of social change is no longer reserved to students of political sciences and development studies. Increasingly business students are recognized as possessing important skills that can drive social change. This new discipline is often referred to as Social Entrepreneurship (S-ENT). S-ENT describes the discovery and sustainable exploitation of opportunities to create public goods. This is usually done through the generation of disequilibria in market and non-market environments. The S-ENT process can in some cases lead to the creation of social enterprises. These social ventures are hybrid organizations exhibiting characteristics of both the for-profit and not-for profit sector. People engaging in S-ENT are usually referred to as social entrepreneurs, a term that describes resourceful individuals working to create social innovation. They do not only have to identify (or create) opportunities for social change (that so far have been unexploited), they must also muster the resources necessary to turn these opportunities into reality. A typical example is Prof. Muhammad Yunus, founder of the Grameen Bank (Bangladesh) and recipient of the Nobel Peace price in recognition of his contribution to poverty alleviation through the invention and popularization of Microfinance. Other examples include fair trade or car-sharing. Today many foundations aim to identify and promote social entrepreneurs. Two prominent examples are Ashoka and the Skoll Foundation. So called venture philanthropists adopt methods from the domain of venture capital, for example, encouraging social entrepreneurs to provide detailed business plans and to measure and report systematically on their social performance. Social Return on Investment (S-ROI) analysis is an example, for an emerging tool aiming to describe the social impact of S-ENT in dollar terms, relative to the philanthropic investment made.
 

The course´s development of personal competence:

Participants in this course will learn what role management students can play in the initiation of social change. In particular they will become skilled at how to identify opportunities for social change and how to develop plans for their exploitation. They will also acquire the basic skills needed for launching and growing social enterprises.

This course is part of the minor in Social Entrepreneurship

 

· Bornstein D. 1998. Changing the World on a Shoestring. The Atlantic Monthly. 281(1): 34-39.

· Drucker, Peter, 1989: What Business Can Learn from Nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, Jul/Aug89, Vol. 67.

· Dees JG. 1998. Enterprising Nonprofits. Harvard Business Review. 76(1): 54-66.

· Prahalad, C. K.; Hammond, Allen, 2002: Serving the world's poor, profitably, in: Harvard Business Review, Sept 2002.

· Yunus M. 1998. Poverty Alleviation: Is Economics Any Help? Lessons from the Grameen Bank Experience. Journal of International Affairs. 52(1): 47-65.

· Porter, Michael E., Kramer, Mark R., 1999: Philanthropy's New Agenda: Creating Value, Harvard Business Review; Nov/Dec99, Vol. 77(6): 121-130

· Robert S. Kaplan, 1999: New Profit, Inc.: Governing the Nonprofit Enterprise, HBS Case, 9-197-036.

· Letts CWR, William, Grossman A. 1997. Virtuous Capital: What Foundations Can Learn from Venture Capitalists. Harvard Business Review. 75(2): 36-43.