Exam Flashcards
What motivated both social innovation and entrepreneurship and regular entrepreneurship? Martin, Roger and Sally Osberg (2007): “Social Entrepreneurship: The case for a definition”
motivated by the opportunity they identify, pursuing that vision relentlessly, and deriving considerable psychic reward from the process of realizing their ideas. R
What is one key difference between one and another?Martin, Roger and Sally Osberg (2007): “Social Entrepreneurship: The case for a definition”
Value Proposition. The paper’s distinction between social entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship relies on the value proposition. Whereas one wants to profit, the other aims for value in the form of large-scale, transformational benefit for a significant segment of society or society.
What are the three components of social innovation and entrepreneurship?Martin, Roger and Sally Osberg (2007): “Social Entrepreneurship: The case for a definition”
1 – Identifying a stable but inherently unjust equilibrium that causes the exclusion, marginalization, or suffering of a segment of humanity that lacks the financial means or political clout to achieve any transformative benefit on its own.
2 – Identifying an opportunity in this unjust equilibrium, developing a social value proposition, and bringing to bear inspiration, creativity, direct action, courage, and fortitude, thereby challenging the stables state’s hegemony.
3 – Forging a new, stable equilibrium that releases trapped potential or alleviates the suffering of the targeted group, and through imitation and the creation of a stable ecosystem around the new equilibrium ensuring a better future for the targeted group and even society at large
What concepts should be differentiated from social entrepeneurship? Martin, Roger and Sally Osberg (2007): “Social Entrepreneurship: The case for a definition”
Social Service Provision (Red Cross) and Social Activism (Gandhi)
What are the objectives of social entrepeneruship?Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
Creating social value and economic value. Like charitable nonprofits, social enterprises seek to create social value, but they employ a market-based organizational form to sustain this value creation. The surplus benefits organizational activity and primarily targets beneficiaries, not owners.
From where do decisions to start social ventures come from? Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
Decisions to start social ventures come from other-oriented emotions of compassion. Other-oriented means that entrepreneurs have concerns about others and their suffering.
Compassion is characterized by its other-orientation and emotional connection linking an individual to a suffering community, and produces sensitivity to the pain and needs of others. Similar to empathy, but compassion elicits suffering along with those in need and desire to relieve this suffering. It acts as a prosocial motivator.
What are some of the challenges of social entrepreneurship? Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
1) Combining key elements of market-based organizing, where resources are acquired by promising direct financial returns, with charity-based organizing, where resources are acquired by promising donors indirect social returns and creating social value. These goals may be in conflict. 2) Typically emerges in contexts where markets are perceived to be failed. Ventures must bear the risk involved with launching a new enterprise but also with constructing new institutions that would support that enterprise.
What is compassion? Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
A prosocial motivator characterized by other-orientation and an emotional connection to others in suffering
What is the main proposition of this article? “Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
The model identifies three mechanisms that transform compassion into social entrepreneurship: integrative thinking, prosocial cost-benefit analysis, and commitment to alleviating others’ suffering.
How does compassion encourage social entrepeneurship? “Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
(1) increasing integrative thinking, (1) encourages to search for solutions that promise collective gains, prosocial motivation increases attention to information about others’ perspective, broad and creative associations (2) traditionally cost-benefit analysis, engage when personal benefits outweigh personal costs, compassion makes others’ outcomes valued more highly, wider search for benefits (2) inducing prosocial judgements regarding costs and benefits of social entrepreneurship, and (3) fostering commitment to alleviate others’ suffering. (3) sustain behavioral direction, compassion enhances dedication to a cause, increase willingness to invest time and energy to help others, emotional ties, reinforces commitment
Can you explain pragmatic legitimacy and moral legitimacy? “Miller, Toyah L., Matthew G. Grimes, Jeffery S. McMullen and Timothy J. Vogus (2012): ”Venturing for others with heart and head: how compassion encourages social entrepreneurship”
Pragmatic legitimacy - Large companies and funders are increasingly pushing for increased
accountability from social enterprises. Pragmatic legitimacy tend to increase when powerful actors are
engaging in a practice or behavior etc. In this case, as large funders are increasingly supporting and
demanding increased accountability from social enterprises, the legitimacy increases.
Moral legitmacy - When it comes to moral legitimacy, it has to do with a view that is widespread in socities
and if a practice, bahaviour etc. is considered “accepted” or not. First, a scepticism towards governments
and the private sector has been growing, in regards to how much they can or even is prepared to do when
it comes to social problems. The second reason is the bandwagon effect, resulting from successful stories
about social entrepreneurs and their businesses. Both reasons have increased the moral legitimacy of
social enterprises.
Besvarad.
What are BOP Markets? Prahalad, C. K. (2012), “Bottom of the pyramid as a source of breakthrough innovations”
It consists of over four billion people who live on less than $2/day.
The World Resources Institute and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) did a detailed study of the BOP around the world and estimated that the market is about $5 trillion in purchasing power parity (World Resources Institute, 2007). We can safely conclude that there is a large, untapped market.
What are the four As? Prahalad, C. K. (2012), “Bottom of the pyramid as a source of breakthrough innovations”
- Creating an awareness of the product and service such
that the BOP consumers and producers know what is
available and on offer, and how to use it; - Enabling access such that even consumers in remote
locations are able to get access to the products/service; - Ensuring that the product or service is affordable.
Most often, this is the most difficult problem for firms
from the developed markets to come to terms with. We
need to provide world-class quality (not luxury) at
prices that are 1/50 or better such as a $50 cataract
surgery (with world-class quality); and - Focusing on availability. To build trust and a loyal
base at the BOP, we have to ensure an uninterrupted
supply of products and services.
What is the best way of working with innovation within BOP? Prahalad, C. K. (2012), “Bottom of the pyramid as a source of breakthrough innovations”
“working within an innovation sandbox” (Prahalad, 2006).
In “working within an innovation sandbox”, recognized constraintes and consumer insights are boundaries of innovation sandbox and all innovations have to be developed within these constraintes.
Innovation in BOP markets is a continuous process of learning and refinement.
What strategy can companies use to leverage their existing infrastructure? 4 Simanis, Erik (2012): “Reality check at the bottom of the pyramid”, Harvard Business Review Vol. 90:6, pp. 120-125
Low-price, low-margin, high-volume models can be successful when the company can leverage an existing infrastructure that serves wealthier customers to offer a product or service to poor customers; and when customers already know how to buy and use the offering.
