Health     Entrepreneurship     France     Poverty     Education     Mobile     Food     Crisis     Productivity     non-profit     Innovation     Global impact     TED     TEDx     Data     Reid Hoffman     Work Environment     Jean François Noubel     Motivation     Monnaie libre     Royal Society of Arts     Dan Pink     économie     OCDE     Agriculture     Children     Global     finance     Technology     Entreprise     Max Lugavere     Al Gore     Le Monde     Social     Harvard Business Review     Disruption     Khan Academy     David Kirkpatrick     Techonomy     Personalized Health     Secours Catholique     Privacy     Personal Data     Quantified Self     Health 2.0     Misdiagnosis     Exponential Growth     Leadership     Apple     Martin Luther King     Simon Sinek     Singularity University     Daniel Kraft     Society     RSA     RMI     Allocations     Endeavor Entrepreneur Summit     Future     Tim O'Reilly     Web 3.0     Techcrunch     Sustainable Cities     Self-driving cars     Current TV     NYC     Africa     Anonymous extraordinairies     Oprah Winfrey     india     profit     risk     Invisible Children     Natalie Warne     Dyson Award     schwab foundation     water     Linacre     TedxTeen     Airdrop     social entreprise     Healthcare     EYIF     FEED     US     Innovation Tour     Europe     Department of State     science     Steven Johnson     namitete     medic mobile     devex     poptech social innovation     collaboration     josh nesbit     strategy     growth     Schools     Communications     Funding     Loans     Medical Care     Micro Loans     Malnutrition     CREN     World Economic Forum     Interview     Nutrition     Youth     Social Entrepreneurs     Wellness     Humanitary     mPowering     quora     Stats     silicon valley     tech     philantropy     crowdfunding     Developing world     Hans Rosling     engagement     Kamael Ann Sugrim     Design     Scale     Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation     Marc Koska     Safepoint

The Seven Growth Strategies of Social Entrepreneurship

25 Nov

Social entrepreneurs apply different growth strategies depending on their company’s development stage and whether they have quantitative or qualitative value-adding ambitions. It is about finding an optimal organizational size and the right way to grow in terms of development, rather than pursuing growth for the sake of growth.

 

In other words, size does not always matter, and small can be beautiful too.

 

In the field of social entrepreneurship one of the following strategies are, therefore, typically applied:

 

a. Remain small in organizational size and focus on other growth parameters, e.g. employee happiness, environmental improvements or building local economies.

b. Grow quantitatively in size, e.g. turnover and number of employees by attracting investors, expanding into new markets and/or increasing the customer base.

c. Replicate the business concept to other national or global regions, e.g. through systematic franchising or ‘amoebic’ multiplication of small independent units.

d. Build a movement, e.g. by spreading the core idea and principles so that governments, mainstream businesses, local communities or other entrepreneurs decide to work in support of the same purpose.

e. Collaborate or merge with other social ventures in the same cluster to develop processes, products and services or engage in ‘network production’, e.g. so micro-entrepreneurs can join forces to supply large companies.

f. Enter into partnerships with actors in the private, public or civil sectors, e.g. to gain access to knowledge, skills, infrastructure and/or capital.

g. Sell parts of or the entire social venture to a mainstream, commercial business, e.g. to increase the knowledge and impact of the concept or so it goes mainstream.

 

The choice of growth strategy is closely linked to financing the social venture: models range from what the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship categorizes as :

 

- leverage nonprofit ventures, i.e. 100% external financing through, for example, donations, sponsorships and public funding but where upscaling is generated through private and public sector partnerships;

- hybrid nonprofit ventures, i.e. a mix of external financing like grants or subsidized loans and revenue income from own products or services;

- social business ventures, for-profit entities with 100% revenue income from own products or services, also referred to as for-profit social enterprises, ‘FOPSEs’.

 

To overcome the limitations that either purely charitable or commercial companies entail, the hybrid not-for-profit model is, according to the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, increasing in popularity. It enables social entrepreneurs to use the profits from their main business to cross-subsidise their charitable work. It also enables them to take up other forms of capital, such as debt and venture capital through the for-profit entity, while the nonprofit entity can receive tax-exempted grants and provide nonprofit-making services to a community – a blended value space that is also seen in the private sector where some companies place their altruistic or CSR-related activities in a company foundation.


Comments are closed.