Response to "Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for a Definition" by Roger L. Martin and Sally Osberg

In stark contrast to the last article, this paper advocates a tighter definition for "Social Entrepreneurship" to limit it to direct actions which ultimately create and sustain a new equilibrium that more fairly addresses the needs of a previously marginalized segment of society. One of the points in this article that most resonated with my point of view is the belief that "a successful shift (of equilibrium) does not depend on the creation of a single venture, but on the appropriation and replication of the model." In other words, the change created in the world must be so well established that it no longer requires the constant input of skills or services from the original entrepreneur. The sustainability of the venture is what separates social entrepreneurship from other charitable organizations, and what makes the eventual success of these ventures such an exciting challenge.

Response to "Reshaping Social Entrepreneurship" by Paul Light

One of the overarching themes of this article by Paul Light is that the most commonly accepted definition of "Social Entrepreneurship" is too narrow, and places too much emphasis on the individual, rather than the organization, or the "pipeline of support" that goes into making the social venture successful. His argument is that this places more emphasis on who the entrepreneurs are, rather than what they have accomplished. To some extent, I would say he has a point - it is hard to imagine an article about Grameen bank without it mentioning Muhammad Yunus. However, this focus on the individual leaders is what gives a human face to the overarching corporation. Understanding the attributes necessary to become a social entrepreneur (traits such as innovativeness, perseverance, and the ability to market an idea) helps prospective entrepreneurs to observe and better prepare themselves for the challenges that lie ahead. Knowing what a particular organization has accomplished is only part of the story - but it is an understanding of the skills and traits necessary to lead the social change that is translatable to future social entrepreneurs seeking new ventures in potentially dramatically different circumstances.

Response to "The meaning of 'Social Entrepreneurship'" by J. Gregory Dees

Upon reading this article by J. Gregory Dees, I came away with a fairly clear understanding of what an "entrepreneur" is, but still a fairly limited understanding of what it means to be a "social entrepreneur". One of the phrases from the article that stuck with me was Dees' description of the typical market mentality, which ensures that "entrepreneurs who an pay the most for resources are typically the ones who can put the resources to higher valued uses, as determined by the marketplace." I think the biggest question in my mind after reading this article (and likely will be my biggest question throughout the course) was: How do we measure social value? Is there some conceivable way to rate the effectiveness of various social ventures? If there were a means to quantitatively evaluate social entrepreneurs, perhaps we could arrive at a new market system in which the social entrepreneurs who can demonstrate the highest value would receive the most outside aid/support for their ventures.

This is the generic first post . . .

. . . to make sure I haven't screwed everything up already :)