Visit www.buentrepreneurship.wordpress.com for more works related to entrepreneurship! Made by students from Bishop's University, Quebec, Canada.

1. Bishop’s University
Social Entrepreneurship
Creating Change in the Global Community
Topics in Entrepreneurship
For: Steve Karpenko
BMG 320
By:
Adam Hargreaves,
Rebecca Knox
April 8th
, 2015

2. 2
Social
Entrepreneurship
Table of contents
1.0 Abstract
2.0 What is a social enterprise?
2.1 Entrepreneurship definition
2.2 Social Entrepreneurship Definition
2.3 Types of Social Ventures
2.4 Why is it needed?
3.0 History of Social Entrepreneurship
3.1 Early Social Entrepreneurship
3.2 Modern Social Entrepreneurship
4.0 Financial Constraints
4.1 Government Grants
4.2 Crowdfunding
4.3 Venture Philanthropy
5.0 How Can the Field Attract Talented Workers?
5.1 What Are We Looking For?
5.2 “Mass Recruiters”
5.3 A Case: Teach For America
6.0 How Government & Social Entrepreneurs Work Together
6.1 What is Currently Happening?
6.2 What Government Can Do
7.0 How Do Schools Nurture Social Entrepreneurship
7.1 University Level
7.2 Earlier Years
7.3 Where Can We Go From Here?
8.0 Discussion

3. 1.0
Abstract
The primary goals with regards to our research were to define in our own terms what
constitutes being a social entrepreneur- essentially being an entrepreneur with social
causes being at the forefront. Additionally, we hoped to learn from this research so that
we may begin to create a dialogue surrounding the creation of a unique Canadian model
for needs specific to our communities.
We found the use of a social enterprise can achieve not just social but financial
growth all while improving the community. We have looked at specific cases of social
entrepreneurs to attempt to assess what they have done right and where they could have
used help. Through assessing these cases of success and failure stories, we hoped to
gather knowledge so that we can ground it in our own cultural backgrounds and
eventually present ideas on how to establish a social enterprise within our communities.
We researched both quantitative as well as qualitative data as we felt this would
help us paint a better picture of the social enterprise atmosphere in Canada. We focused
our research on six main ideas within the spectrum related to social entrepreneurship.
Each one of these sections deals with a specific aspect of a social enterprise- each serving
it’s own important function within the well-oiled machine that is social entrepreneurship.

4. 4
Social
Entrepreneurship
2.0
What
Is
A
Social
Enterprise?
2.1
Entrepreneurship
Definition
To
understand
Social
entrepreneurship
we
first
would
like
to
define
entrepreneurship
to
help
in
comparing
and
contrasting
the
two.
Entrepreneurship
is
“the
process
of
creating
value
by
bringing
together
a
unique
package
of
resources
to
exploit
an
opportunity.”(Forbat,
2007).
The
main
goal
of
typical
entrepreneurship
is
to
maximize
profits
and
shareholders
wealth.
2.2
Social
Entrepreneurship
Definition
In
its
simplest
form
social
entrepreneurship
is
“the
use
of
business
practices
and
techniques
in
an
attempt
to
solve
social
problems
in
a
sustainable
way.”(The
new
Heroes,
2005).
How
this
concept
is
applied
to
actual
real
world
situations
ranges
tremendously.
The
definition
for
social
entrepreneurship
has
long
been
debated
amongst
the
business
community
as
to
what
exactly
makes
a
social
enterprise
count
as
a
social
and
not
a
business
enterprise.
So
far
there
has
not
been
a
consensus
as
to
what
makes
a
social
entrepreneur.
Does
any
business
count
as
a
social
enterprise
because
they
hire
people,
reducing
unemployment?
We
argue
no,
a
company
that
introduces
potato
chips
to
China
would
not
be
considered
a
social
entrepreneur
even
though
they
hire
thousands
of
people.
A
better
definition
of
social
entrepreneurship
is
a
process
where
people
build
or
change
institutions
to
advance
solutions
to
social
problems,
such
as
illiteracy,
illness,
human
rights,
environmental
destruction
and
corruption
with
the
purpose
of
improving
life.
(Bornstien
&
Davis.

5. 2010).
Not
just
trying
to
fix
but
understanding
how
an
issue
relates
to
society
allows
social
entrepreneurs
to
develop
ingenuous
solutions
and
to
mobilize
resources
to
help
society.
Unlike
traditional
businesses,
social
enterprises
focus
on
the
maximization
of
social
betterment,
rather
than
maximizing
profit
gains.
(Baron
&
Davis.
2010).
2.3
Types
of
Social
Ventures
In
“The
Power
Of
Unreasonable
people”,
John
Elkington
and
Pamela
Hartigan
categorize
social
entrepreneurs,
business
structures
as
falling
under
three
different
models,
varying
between
situations
and
economic
climates.
The
three
models
are,
leveraged
non-­‐profit,
hybrid
non-­‐profit
and
social
businesses.(Elkington
&
Hartigan.
2007).
A
leveraged
non-­‐profit
venture
needs
external
financing
in
order
to
operate
and
provide
a
public
good.
On
the
other
hand,
a
hybrid
non-­‐profit
venture
retains
a
portion
of
its
profits
in
order
to
maintain
operations
and
further
social
good.
Finally
a
social
business
venture
generates
profits,
the
difference
being
they
reinvest
this
profit
to
further
social
benefits
instead
of
returning
the
profits
to
their
shareholders.
.(Elkington.
&
Hartigan.
2007).
Companies
may
transition
between
stages
as
they
grow,
starting
as
a
leveraged
non-­‐profit
until
they
eventually
have
enough
profits
to
be
self-­‐sustainable
and
become
a
Social
Business
venture.
2.4
Why
is
it
Needed?
Why
have
social
enterprises?
Why
not
use
regular
business
or
the
government
to
solve
these
social
issues?
One
reason
social
entrepreneurship
is
needed
is
most

6. 6
Social
Entrepreneurship
businesses
will
look
at
a
social
problem
and
not
see
large
profit
growth
therefore
will
not
waste
investor
capital
on
this
venture.
Business
entrepreneurships
need
to
maximize
shareholder
wealth
once
publicly
listed
and
social
programs
don’t
always
have
the
highest
monetary
return.
The
reason
we
cant
rely
on
Government
to
solve
these
problems
is
typically
governments
term
is
four
years,
which
leads
to
a
constant
cycle
of
people
starting
projects
and
not
completing
them
or
only
producing
short
term
solutions
to
be
re-­‐elected
in
the
next
term.
Social
entrepreneurs
on
the
other
hand
are
focused
on
the
social
return
and
are
willing
to
have
slow
profit
growth
and
will
stay
with
the
project
till
a
solution
is
met,
this
leads
to
more
sustainable
and
long-­‐term
solutions.
Another
reason
people
may
want
to
start
looking
into
social
entrepreneurship
is
due
to
‘Deloitte’s
global
2015
millennial
survey’,
which
found
that
Millennials
believe
a
successful
business
should
be
measured
in
more
then
just
financial
performance,
but
also
believe
businesses
should
seek
to
improve
society.
Millennials
are
also
very
charitable
and
strive
to
improve
social
life;
63
percent
of
Mellennials
have
donated
to
charity,
43
percent
have
actively
volunteered
and
52
percent
have
signed
petitions.
(Deloitte,2015).
What
this
means
for
business
owners
is
the
next
generation
of
the
workforce
doesn’t
want
to
work
for
the
typical
“greedy”
business
world.
They
want
to
be
part
of
a
company
that
attempts
to
improve
the
world.
Therefore
in
order
to
attract
future
leaders
companies
need
to
become
social
enterprises
that
serve
a
higher
purpose
as
well
as
produce
profits.

7.
3.0
History
of
Social
Entrepreneurship
Credit
for
popularizing
the
term
“Social
Entrepreneurship”
can
be
given
to
William
Drayton,
founder
of
Ashoka
the
world’s
first
organization
to
promote
social
entrepreneurship.
During
a
visit
to
India
in
the
early
1980’s
Drayton
was
inspired
by
Vinoda
Bhave’s
“land
gift
movement”,
which
aimed
to
break
the
poverty
cycle
by
getting
the
richer
people
to
give
their
land
up
so
it
could
be
more
fairly
distributed
to
the
less
wealthy
people.
The
success
of
this
movement
showed
Drayton
the
effectiveness
of
social
entrepreneurship
in
making
change
for
the
better.(Leadbeater,
1996).
Ashoka
is
now
a
worldwide
company
promoting
the
idea
of
creating
social
change
through
the
use
of
an
informative
website.
Ashoka
offers
advice
on
financing
and
support
for
social
entrepreneurs
in
all
different
types
of
economic
climates
around
the
world.
3.1
Early
Social
Entrepreneurship
Although
the
term
was
only
made
popular
35
years
ago
social
entrepreneurs
have
always
existed,
in
the
past
however
they
were
called
visionaries,
humanitarians,
philanthropists
or
saints.
(Bornstein
&
Davis.
2010).
Some
early
pioneers
of
social
entrepreneurship
are:
1.
Robert
Owen
(1771-­‐1858)
–
This
mill
owner
was
a
pioneer
in
the
social
entrepreneurship
movement.
He
improved
working
conditions
at
factories;
he
also
laid
the
foundation
of
the
cooperative
movement
by
starting
a
store
for
factory

8. 8
Social
Entrepreneurship
workers
to
buy
goods
for
a
little
more
then
wholesale
price.
Leading
to
a
better
quality
of
life
for
all
his
workers.
(Owen,
1908)
2.
Florence
Nightingale
(1820-­‐1910)
–
Arguably
one
of
the
most
famous
social
entrepreneurs
in
history,
Florence
founded
the
first
nursing
school
and
outlined
modern
nursing
practices.
This
has
saved
countless
lives
and
continues
to
today.
(Florence,
Nightingale,
2015)
3.
William
Booth
(1829-­‐1912)
–
William
and
his
wife
started
the
East
London
Christian
Mission
in
1865
to
bring
the
Christian
message
to
those
in
need
by
meeting
their
physical
and
spiritual
needs.
He
later
rebranded
in
1878
to
Salvation
Army
open
to
all
races,
and
needs.
(Salvation
Army,
2015).
In
the
past
Social
Entrepreneurs
were
typically
non-­‐profit
organizations
relying
on
external
financing
to
continue
their
social
good.
This
method
can
work
and
is
used
around
the
world
even
today
but
charitable
programs
tend
to
have
less
long
lasting
effect
as
they
are
not
self
sustainable
and
are
constantly
looking
for
more
funding.
This
all
started
to
change
as
we
entered
the
21st
century
and
social
entrepreneurship
began
to
be
redefined,
no
longer
relying
on
others
to
remain
open
but
finding
creative
ways
to
have
social
impact,
while
making
enough
profit
to
be
sustainable.

9. 3.2
Modern
Social
Entrepreneurship
In
later
years
social
entrepreneurships
have
changed
from
charitable
organizations
to
actual
businesses
that
are
able
to
more
effectively
solve
social
problems
while
still
being
self-­‐sustainable.
Technology
has
had
a
major
influence
in
social
entrepreneurship
becoming
a
global
movement,
more
particularly
the
internet
and
social
networking
have
had
the
largest
impact
allowing
social
entrepreneurs
to
collaborate
and
share
ideas
must
faster
then
ever
before.
(Malecki,
1997).
The
Internet
has
enabled
social
entrepreneurs
to
spread
their
ideas
globally
with
little
to
no
money
on
open
source
websites,
this
has
lead
to
the
global
community
coming
together
to
solve
local
problems
by
collaborating
online.
Some
examples
of
social
ventures
that
have
succeeded
thanks
to
new
technology
include
companies
such
as
‘Khan
Academy’.
Khan
Academy
is
a
website
that
uses
instructional
videos
to
allow
anyone
with
access
to
a
computer,
the
ability
to
learn
a
range
of
subjects
at
their
own
pace,
for
zero
cost.
Khan
Academy’s
goal
is
to
increase
education
worldwide.
(Khan
Academy,
2015).
Toms
shoes
also
became
a
global
brand
through
social
networking,
founded
by
Blake
Mycoskie
in
Arlington
Texas,
it
is
a
for
profit
business,
Toms
social
swing
is,
for
every
pair
of
shoes
sold
a
new
pair
is
given
to
an
impoverished
child,
“the
one
for
one
concept”.
(Walkley.
2009).
Toms
spread
their
campaign
and
ideal
across
social
media
and
quickly
became
one
of
the
most
well-­‐known
shoe
companies
in
the
world,
using
their
social
movement
as
a
positive
marketing
tool.
Toms
has
expanded
their
product
range,
now
supplying,
eye
exams,
birthing
classes
and
access
to
water

10. 10
Social
Entrepreneurship
to
underprivileged
people
in
third
world
countries.
To
date
Toms
has
helped
restore
sight
for
275,000
people,
supplied
67,000
weeks
of
safe
drinking
water
and
helped
train
40
million
women
across
the
globe
on
safe
birthing
practices.
(Toms.ca,
2015).
Toms
is
a
very
good
example
of
a
modern
social
business
venture
because
they
make
a
large
profit
but
reinvest
a
majority
back
into
the
social
programs
they
have
set
up.
4.0
Financial
Constraints
Social
entrepreneurs
have
proven
that
they
are
able
to
improve
social
problems
and
make
a
difference
but
are
often
hindered
by
a
lack
of
funding
and
have
trouble
finding
traditional
investors
willing
to
invest
in
social
problems.
A
business
that
does
not
promise
profits
within
five
to
seven
years
will
not
attract
traditional
investment
no
matter
how
important
their
work
is.
Social
businesses
are
typically
able
to
be
self-­‐sustainable
once
up
and
running
but
for
the
non-­‐profit
social
enterprises
they
rely
on
foundations,
philanthropists
or
governments,
all
options
typically
consisting
of
modest
sized
investments
that
are
relatively
short
term.
(Bornstein
&
Davis.
2010).
Social
entrepreneurs
have
a
hard
time
receiving
traditional
finance
due
to
their
business
plan,
which
puts
social
impact
at
the
top
of
its
priorities,
compared
to
traditional
businesses
that
are
focused
on
monetary
return.
Social
entrepreneurs
have
difficulty
receiving
funding
from
governments,
as
they
typically
like
to
pay
for
services
as
they
are
delivered,
rather
then
investing
in
a
long-­‐term
solution.
(Bornstein
&
Davis.
2010).
A
new
form
of
financing
has
started
to
emerge
called
venture
philanthropy,
a
type
of
venture
capitalist
who
seeks
social

11. impact
over
monetary
growth.
(Weiss
&
Clark.
2015).
Although
this
new
type
of
investment
is
exciting
for
the
world
of
social
entrepreneurship
it
is
still
in
its
early
stages
and
not
very
many
venture
philanthropists
institutions
exist.
Social
entrepreneurs
are
starting
to
combine
all
the
different
types
of
funding,
including
grants,
bank
loans,
crowd
funding
and
venture
philanthropy
together
in
order
to
achieve
maximum
social
impact.
The
most
common
and
new
forms
of
financing
a
social
enterprise
are
described
in
detail
below.
4.1
Government
Grants
One
of
the
main
sources
social
entrepreneurs
seek
funding
from
is
the
government
as
they
have
the
resources
to
fund
social
programs
and
the
motive
to
create
social
impact.
Typically
receiving
government
funding
gives
more
credibility
to
an
organization;
if
they
are
consistently
receiving
grants
and
winning
competitions
for
funding
they
may
attract
additional
investors
as
a
result.
(Sherman,
2004).
Another
benefit
of
government
funding
is
it
can
sometimes
be
accompanied
by
professional
assistance.
The
government
who
is
providing
the
grant
my
also
offer
workshops,
seminars
and
consulting
in
order
to
help
the
social
enterprise
grow
and
maximize
impact.
Government
grants
can
also
help
improve
their
network
by
introducing
them
to
a
larger
group
of
social
entrepreneurs.
Sometimes
governments
will
bring
together
all
the
recipients
of
a
particular
grant
in
order
to
expand
their
network,
as
well
as
compare
experience
and
increase
awareness
of
other
potential
funding
or
resources
for
that
particular
type
of
venture.
(Canada
Business,
2014).

12. 12
Social
Entrepreneurship
Even
with
these
benefits
some
social
enterprises
decide
to
stay
away
from
government
grants
for
a
couple
of
reasons.
To
qualify
for
funding
organizations
may
have
to
reshape
their
business
in
order
to
fit
in
the
guidelines
set
out
by
the
government,
this
may
be
hard
to
do
while
still
maintaining
the
social
ideal.
Another
downside
to
government
grants
is
the
monitoring
of
your
business;
typically
larger
grants
will
come
with
a
stipulation
that
the
business
practices
and
performance
will
be
monitored.
(Sherman,
2004).
Some
entrepreneurs
find
this
monitoring
to
be
quite
intrusive
and
may
decide
to
avoid
government
grants
for
this
reason.
Potentially
costly
problems
with
government
grants
are
some
work
on
a
reimbursement
basis,
making
businesses
upfront
the
costs
and
submit
cost
reports
then
wait
for
reimbursement.
This
would
not
be
bad
if
it
weren’t
for
governments
being
notoriously
slow
in
payback,
sometimes
going
two
too
three
months
before
reimbursement
is
received.
(Sherman,
2004).
For
a
social
enterprise
that
is
well
organized
and
likes
taking
direction
a
government
grant
may
be
a
good
source
of
financing,
as
it
cost
nothing
other
then
time
to
receive
a
grant.
For
others
the
lack
of
certainty
and
availability
of
loans
may
make
government
grants
a
bad
decision
when
finding
financing.
4.2
Crowdfunding
One
of
the
more
recent
and
most
successful
forms
of
financing
is
a
concept
known
as
crowd
funding,
(or
crowdsourcing).
Tripling
in
the
last
year
becoming
a
16
billion
dollar
industry
Crowdfunding
is
quickly
turning
into
one
of
social
entrepreneurs
favorite
avenues
for
financing.
(Clifford,
2015).
Crowdfunding
is
an
Internet
based

13. form
of
funding
that
doesn’t
ask
for
one
large
loan
but
instead
asks
for
many
small
loans
from
multiple
individuals
to
reach
a
large
fundraising
goal.
(Lambert
&
Schwienbacher.
2010)
Instead
of
offering
equity
like
a
typical
public
investment,
crowd
funding
often
uses
a
reward
program,
which
offers
incentives
that
increase
in
value
as
the
value
of
the
donation
increases,
in
some
unique
cases
it
may
be
strictly
donation
based.(
Ordanini,
et
al,
2011).
These
incentives
typically
are
products
offered
by
the
company
or
products
made
specifically
for
the
crowd
funding
campaign.
This
method
avoids
traditional
funding
such
as
banks
and
grants;
crowd
funding
goes
directly
to
the
consumer
and
asks
for
help
in
getting
a
project
off
the
ground
or
to
the
next
step.
Crowd
funding
has
become
a
popular
avenue
for
social
entrepreneurs
to
receive
funding
as
it
is
easier
to
convince
the
public
to
invest
in
social
good
and
is
much
less
risk
for
multiple
investors
putting
in
small
amounts
compared
to
traditional
financers
taking
on
the
full
risk
of
the
entire
loan.
Some
benefits
of
Crowdfunding
is
it
is
essentially
a
marketing
tool
as
much
as
it
is
an
investment
tool,
companies
are
able
to
spread
their
business
idea
to
a
very
large
audience
and
intern
may
meet
others
who
share
similar
ideas.
A
Crowdfunding
campaign
is
fairly
simple
to
put
together
compared
to
a
traditional
business
plan
needed
for
most
loans
or
grants.
Crowdfunding
uses
videos
and
visuals
and
usually
consists
of
a
pitch
about
the
idea
or
product
in
an
informal
manner.
Crowdfunding
campaigns
also
normally
receive
a
lot
of
feedback
on
their
idea
and
this
may
help
maximize
their
impact
having
input
from
others.
In
other
industries
the
fear
of
people
copying
the
idea
is
considered
a
con,
in
social
entrepreneurship
most
encourage
others
to
go
out
and
do
a
social
good
using
their
idea,
this
can
be
seen
as

14. 14
Social
Entrepreneurship
a
plus
depending
on
the
goals
of
the
entrepreneur.
(Isenberg,
2012).
The
United
states
also
recently
passed
a
law
allowing
entrepreneurs
to
sell
small
shares
in
their
company
on
a
Crowdfunding
style
platform,
this
would
avoid
the
heavy
cost
of
going
public
and
could
see
a
new
type
of
investor
using
Crowdfunding.
People
will
now
receive
payment
if
the
project
succeeds
so
they
will
be
invested
in
its
progress
more
then
with
previous
Crowdfunding
campaigns.
(Finley,
2015).
Crowdfunding
is
seen
as
a
very
viable
option
for
social
entrepreneurs
seeking
funding
and
has
a
very
promising
future
as
the
world
comes
closer
with
technology
and
millennials
starts
addressing
social
issues
together.
4.3
Venture
Philanthropy
Venture
capitalism
has
been
around
for
as
long
as
entrepreneurs
have
been
around
investing
in
seemingly
risky
ventures
hoping
for
large
returns.
The
new
form
of
this
has
emerged
specifically
for
the
social
entrepreneurship
sector
known
as
venture
philanthropy.
Venture
philanthropy
uses
the
expertise
and
techniques
used
in
venture
capitalism
but
focuses
on
social
impact
over
return
on
investment.
They
measure
their
return
in
capacity
improvement
and
people
helped
over
monetary
growth.
It
is
estimated
that
there
are
40
institutional
funders
currently
using
this
approach,
investing
upwards
of
60
million
a
year
and
growing.
(Frumkin.
2003).
What
venture
philanthropist
are
trying
to
do
is
not
just
be
a
supplier
of
cash
like
a
charity,
but
instead
consult
and
work
with
social
institutions
so
they
can
further
their
social
impact
and
increase
reach
which
is
the
goal
of
a
Venture
Philanthropist.
(Frumkin,
2003).

15. Some
benefits
to
Venture
philanthropy
is
the
investors
are
looking
for
social
return
over
monetary
return,
so
entrepreneurs
are
able
to
focus
on
social
improvement
instead
of
having
to
worry
about
paying
back
a
loan.
Another
benefit
is
the
typical
length
of
a
venture
philanthropist
investment,
unlike
bank
loans
or
grants
that
are
typically
one
time
investments,
a
Venture
philanthropists
investment
is
typically
5-­‐7
years
and
can
go
far
beyond
that.
(Chauhan,
2015).
The
Benefit
of
this
is
Venture
Philanthropist
will
likely
add
more
money
as
they
see
the
project
growing
and
its
social
capacity
increasing.
Along
with
supplying
funds
Venture
philanthropist
will
typically
also
give
intellectual
and
human
capital
to
the
social
venture
they
have
invested
in.
(Chauhan,
2015).
Some
social
entrepreneurs
find
Venture
Philanthropy
the
best
fit
for
their
business
as
they
may
be
passionate
about
their
cause
but
benefit
from
having
a
business
consultant
to
make
their
venture
sustainable
therefore
furthering
its
impact
to
the
community.
Others
prefer
the
more
hands
off
approach
of
a
bank
loan,
opting
out
of
the
venture
philanthropist
team
member
approach
to
investing.
5.0
How
Can
the
Field
Attract
Talented
Workers?
5.1
What
Are
We
Looking
For?
Unlike
regular
businesses
that
follow
a
structured
business
model,
social
entrepreneurs
are
more
likely
to
create
solutions
to
problems
without
a
road
map,
or
plan
of
attack
per
se.
This
often
open
ended
work
calls
for
a
different
kind
of
brain,
a
revolutionary
thinker.
So
what
are
we
looking
for?
According
to
Bornstein
and
Davis:

16. 16
Social
Entrepreneurship
• Those
Looking
for
Rewarding
work
(More
Than
Money)
• Critical
thinkers,
decision
makers,
risk
takers
• Empathetic,
caring
individuals
• Socially
aware
individuals
As
previously
mentioned,
the
members
of
the
millennial
generation
have
both
a
strong
social
sensibility
as
well
as
social
responsibility.
(Deloitte,
2015)
This
shift
towards
a
more
socially
aware
generation
is
causing
a
shift
in
the
way
we
do
business
say
Bornstein
and
Davis.
Sagawa
and
Jospin
state
that
organizations,
much
like
individuals,
form
their
own
identities
and
personalities.
These
charismatic
personalities
act
as
a
magnet
for
attracting
individuals
who
are
equally
as
charismatic
and
passionate
about
the
same
issues.
(Sagawa
&
Jospin,
2008)
The
future
looks
bright
for
social
enterprises
with
an
incoming
workforce
that
values
rewarding
work
that
will
change
the
communities
they
are
a
part
of.
5.2
“Mass
Recruiters”
Bill
Drayton,
a
global
social
entrepreneur,
believes
that
the
utmost
important
success
factor
for
a
social
enterprise
is
the
acquisition
and
cultivation
of
great
potential.
(Drayton,
2006)
Drayton
believes
the
key
to
success
lies
within
inspiring
and
helping
young
minds
to
realize
what
they
can
be
capable
of.
Drayton
refers
to
social
entrepreneurs
as
“mass
recruiters”
(Drayton,
2006)-­‐
constantly
working
to
challenge
great
minds
to
reach
their
full
potentials.
Most
of
this
“recruitment”
is
done
informally,
as
there
are
not
many
programs
in
place
that
allow
for
a
structured
growth
plan
of
these
exemplary
minds.
One
example
of
a
very
successful
social

17. enterprise
is
Teach
For
America,
which
Drayton
argues
can
serve
as
a
model
for
all
recruiting
social
entrepreneurs.
5.3
Teach
For
America
Teach
For
America’s
mission
is
to
“grow
the
movement
of
leaders
who
work
to
ensure
that
kids
growing
up
in
poverty
get
an
excellent
education.”
(Teach
for
America,
2015)
The
educators
involved
with
teach
for
America
are
social
entrepreneurs
that
are
willing
to
receive
less
pay
in
exchange
for
more
rewarding
work.
Teach
For
America
is
a
perfect
example
of
Drayton’s
“mass
recruiter”
theory.
They
are
constantly
on
the
hunt
for
young
minds
whose
values
of
education
are
aligned
with
those
of
the
organization.
(Bornstein
et
al,
2010)
With
their
charismatic
organization,
Teach
For
America
has
been
able
to
attract
young
educators
from
top
universities
across
the
United
States.
Wendy
Kopp,
who
presented
the
idea
in
her
1989
undergraduate
thesis
at
Princeton,
dreamed
up
Teach
For
America
in
a
university
classroom.
In
1990,
500
committed
individuals
made
Kopp’s
dream
a
reality,
and
it
the
movement
has
been
growing
ever
since.
Teach
For
America’s
model
helps
attract
and
inspire
the
best
and
brightest
from
around
the
country:
Recruit,
Train,
and
Foster.
(Teach
For
America,
2015)
o We
recruit
committed
recent
college
graduates
and
professionals
of
all
backgrounds
to
teach
for
two
years
in
urban
and
rural
public
schools

18. 18
Social
Entrepreneurship
o We
train
and
develop
these
corps
members
so
that
they
have
an
immediate
positive
impact
on
their
students
o We
foster
leadership
of
our
alumni
as
they
address
this
problem
from
all
sectors
Teach
For
America
should
be
treated
as
a
template
for
social
change
in
America.
Teach
For
America
have
proven
themselves
to
be
extremely
successful
since
their
inception.
The
numbers
don’t
lie:
Teach
For
America
credit
themselves
with
transforming
education
in
New
Orleans,
where
the
percentage
of
students
scoring
basic
or
above
on
state
wide
testing
has
increased
from
30%
in
2000
to
53%
in
2010.
(Teach
For
America,
2015)
6.0
How
do
Government
and
Social
Entrepreneurs
Work
Together?
6.1
What
is
Government
Doing
Currently?
As
previously
mentioned,
the
government
offers
grants
to
some
social
enterprises.
However,
fitting
into
the
parameters
of
what
the
government
grant
requires
proves
difficult
for
many
social
entrepreneurs-­‐
causing
many
of
them
to
seek
funding
elsewhere.
(Sherman,
2004)
The
government
and
social
entrepreneurs
have
historically
“suffered
from
a
mutual
lack
of
respect
and
trust.”
(Bornstein
et
al,
2010)
Due
to
the
different
approaches
taken
by
each
to
problem
solving,
different
pressures,
and
different
needs-­‐
government
and
social
entrepreneurs
do
not
always
work
well
together.
However,
government
departments
could
greatly
benefit
from
having
the
minds
of
social
entrepreneurs
at
their
disposal,
as
it
would
make
for
fresh,
effective,
and
unique
solutions
to
structural
issues.

19.
6.2
What
Can
Government
Do?
Bornstein
and
Davis
suggest
that
governments
do
not
need
to
abolish
ineffective
government
resources,
but
instead
deploy
their
resources
differently
within
the
social
sector.
(Bornstein
&
Davis,
2010)
They
suggest
that
rather
than
forcing
social
entrepreneurs
into
strict
guidelines
for
funding,
they
should
instead
“harness
the
potential
of
social
entrepreneurs
and
citizen
organizations
to
achieve
policy
goals,
just
as
they
do
with
business
entrepreneurs
and
companies.”
(Bornstein
&
Davis,
2010)
Social
entrepreneurs
are
long-­‐term
solution
makers,
which
many
government
officials
are
not.
It
is
said
that
this
difference
alone
would
make
solutions
much
more
effective
with
the
help
of
social
entrepreneurs.
7.0
How
Do
Schools
Nurture
Social
Entrepreneurship?
7.1
University
Level
As
Gordon
Bloom
explains,
many
university
students
enter
post-­‐secondary
education
with
a
strong
desire
to
create
social
change
but
are
not
always
given
a
structured
curriculum
to
help
them
achieve
their
dreams.
(Bloom,
2006)
Bloom
goes
on
to
explain
the
structures
used
by
Harvard
and
Stanford
Universities
to
foster
growth
of
future
social
entrepreneurs.
Bloom
talks
about
the
Social
Entrepreneurship
(or
SE)
Lab
at
Harvard.
In
the
figure
below,
Bloom
deconstructs
the
basic
structure
and
goals
of
the
lab.
As
we
can
see,
the
SE
lab
provides
a
very
hands-­‐on,
and
collaborative
curriculum
specially
designed
for
those
wishing
to
put
their
theory
into
practice.

20. 20
Social
Entrepreneurship
(Bloom,
2006)
Bornstein
and
Davis
state
that
although
indeed,
“social
entrepreneurship
has
made
inroads
to
academia,
it
remains
far
from
mainstream.”
(Bornstein
et
al,
2010)
As
of
2010,
there
were
350
professors
in
over
35
countries
teaching
social
entrepreneurship
to
their
students.
(Bornstein
et
al,
2010)
In
Canada,
new
social
entrepreneurship
initiatives
are
“popping
up
across
the
country.”
(Lewington,
2013)
McGill,
University
of
British
Colombia,
and
Simon
Fraser
University
are
among
many
that
have
retooled
their
entrepreneurship
curriculums
to
fit
with
what
Anita
Nowak,
integrating
director
of
the
Social
Economy
Initiative
at
McGill,
calls
a
“generational
zeitgeist.”
(Lewington,
2013)

21. From
a
more
localized
perspective,
Enactus
Canada
is
“shaping
generations
of
entrepreneurial
leaders
who
are
passionate
about
advancing
the
economic,
social
and
environmental
health
of
Canada.”
(Enactus,
2015)
Enactus
Canada
is
part
of
a
global
student
movement
with
35
other
countries-­‐
creating
social,
economic,
and
environmental
change
all
over
the
globe.
At
smaller
schools,
such
as
Bishop’s
University,
where
there
aren’t
high
numbers
of
enrolled
students,
Enactus
is
a
significant
tool
for
aspiring
social
entrepreneurs.
7.2
Earlier
Years
Elanor
Duckworth
explains
that
young
children
are,
in
fact,
very
developed
intellectually.
She
argues
that
children
are
forced
to
lose
their
curious
and
resourceful
ways
when
they
enter
institutions
as
their
“natural
enthusiasm
and
inquisitiveness
becomes
subordinated
to
the
needs
of
adults
enlisted
to
teach
them.”
(Duckworth,
20000)
Duckworth
suggests
that
if
adults
and
educators
stop
discouraging
children’s
ideas
that
seem
different
or
crazy
and
instead
encourage
and
structure
moments
when
children
have
their
own
ideas,
children
could
let
their
willingness
to
try
blossom.
This
being
said,
the
Roots
of
Empathy
organization
(explained
further
in
section
7.3)
encompasses
the
qualities
that
Duckworth
suggests
make
up
a
much-­‐needed
program
within
primary
schools.
7.3
Where
Can
We
Go
From
Here?
“Education
is
the
most
powerful
weapon
which
you
can
use
to
change
the
world.”-­‐
Nelson
Mandela
(BrainyQuote,
2015)

22. 22
Social
Entrepreneurship
Grossberg
argues
that
in
society,
youth
are
extremely
important
and
full
of
potential,
yet
they
are
also
feared.
(Grossberg,
1994)
He
argues
that
as
a
body,
youth
need
to
be
integrated
into
spaces
where
they
can
use
their
full
potential
to
change
things.
Mary
Gordon,
founder
of
Roots
of
Empathy,
insists,
“Everyone
can
be
a
change
maker”.
(Bornstein
et
al,
2010)
She
suggests
that
the
onus
of
teaching
children
to
be
leaders
is
on
educators.
Her
organization,
Roots
of
Empathy,
teams
up
with
elementary
and
pre-­‐school
educators
to
“change
the
world-­‐
child
by
child.”
(Roots
of
Empathy,
2015)
Gordon’s
Organization
does
this
by
teaching
empathy
to
children
early
on
so
that
they
may
build
“caring,
peaceful,
and
civil
societies”
later
on
down
the
road.
(Roots
of
Empathy,
2015)
In
terms
of
where
to
go
in
the
future,
Roots
of
Empathy
is
a
great
start.
Roots
of
Empathy
already
have
educators
across
Canada,
and
the
world.
If
every
Canadian
early
childhood
educator
could
receive
Roots
of
Empathy
training-­‐
imagine
how
much
the
country
could
benefit,
and
how
many
young
social
entrepreneurs
would
be
coming
out
of
the
woodwork.
When
speaking
on
the
importance
of
education
for
social
entrepreneurs,
Delgado
states,
“For
social
youth
enterprises
to
make
the
impact
they
are
capable
of
making
in
this
country,
content
on
this
subject
must
be
addressed
in
the
nation’s
classrooms
at
the
secondary
and
postsecondary
levels.”
(Delgado,
2004)

23. 9.0
Discussion
It
has
become
clear
through
our
research
that
there
has
been
a
societal
paradigm
shift
towards
the
consideration
of
social
issues
that
has
enabled
social
entrepreneurship
to
flourish
over
recent
years.
We
believe
that
in
this
rapidly
growing
and
changing
society,
people
will
continue
to
become
more
and
more
socially
aware
and
responsible.
We
believe
with
the
emergence
of
these
new
mindsets
and
practices,
social
entrepreneurs
have
bright
futures
ahead
of
them.
Additionally,
we
believe
that
not
only
will
this
new,
rapidly
changing
atmosphere
bring
success
to
social
entrepreneurs,
but
also
will
forever
change
the
way
we
do
business.
Through
a
brief
historical
overview
and
social
entrepreneurship’s
functions,
we
were
able
to
develop
our
own
definition
of
what
social
entrepreneurship
means,
in
our
minds.
Our
idealized,
brief
definition
of
social
entrepreneurship
is
an
organization
or
initiative
that
finds
a
need
unmet,
or
poorly
met
need
within
society
that
they
seek
to
change
for
the
betterment
of
the
society
as
a
whole.
We
briefly
touched
on
the
different
types
of
financing
available
for
those
wishing
to
create
social
change.
We
also
discussed
how
to
attract
the
talented,
passionate
minds
needed
within
a
social
enterprise-­‐
and
what
exactly
that
entails.
When
researching
the
potential
partnerships
between
social
entrepreneurs
and
governments,
the
question
was
asked:
“How
much
involvement
should
governments
have?”
There
is
certainly
a
complex
and
detailed
answer
to
this
that
could
be
a
research
paper
on
its
own.
The
track
record
between
the
two
have
not

24. 24
Social
Entrepreneurship
been
the
best-­‐
but
we
believe
if
changes
were
made
on
both
ends,
the
pair
could
do
exceptional
things
on
the
global
scale.
Perhaps
the
most
important
section
of
our
research
was
that
of
the
education
being
done
in
terms
of
social
entrepreneurship.
Although
there
are
existing
programs
that
cater
to
the
needs
of
the
developing
minds
of
young
social
entrepreneurs,
they
are
by
no
means
mainstream
and
therefore
not
accessible
by
all.
It
is
our
belief,
along
with
the
beliefs
of
many
others,
that
if
educated
about
social
matters,
about
empathy,
and
about
caring
from
a
young
age-­‐
anyone
can
be
a
change
maker.

25.
References
Baron,
D.
(2007)
"Corporate
Social
Responsibility
and
Social
Entrepreneurship."
Journal
of
Economics
&
Management
Strategy.
no.
3
:
683-­‐717
Biography.com.
(2015).
Florence
Nightingale.
The
Biography.com
website.
Retrieved
04:05,
Mar
29,
2015,
fromhttp://www.biography.com/people/florence
nightingale-­‐9423539.
Bloom,
G.
(2006)
“The
Social
Entrepreneurship
Laboratory
(SE
Lab):
A
University
Incubator
for
a
Rising
Generation
of
Social
Entrepreneurs”
from
Social
Entrepreneurship:
New
Models
of
Sustainable
Social
Change.
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
2006.
Bornstein,
D.,
Davis,
S.
(2010).
Social
Entrepreneurship:
What
Everyone
Needs
TO
Know.
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press.
Brainy
Quote.
(2015)
Education
Quotes.
Retrieved
from
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/topics/topic_education.html
Canadabusiness.ca,.
(2014).
Government
grants
and
financing
–
Canada
Business
Network.
Retrieved
22
March
2015,
from
http://www.canadabusiness.ca/eng/page/2848/
Chauhan,
L.
(2015).
Venture
Philanthropy:
An
approach
supported
by
collaboration,
LIFT
Philanthropy
partners.
Liftpartners.ca.
retrieved
February
28
2015
Clayton,
J.,
(1908)
Robert
Owen:
Pioneer
of
Social
Reforms
Fifield,
London
Clifford,
C.
(2015).
Crowdfunding
nearly
tripled
last
year,
becoming
a
16
billion
dollar
industry.
Entreprenuer.
Retrieved
from
http://www.entreprenuer.com/article/2244503
Delgado,
M.
(2004)
Social
Youth
Entrepreneurship:
The
Potential
for
Youth
and
Community
Transformation.
Westport,
Conn:
Praeger.
Deloitte,.
(2015).
Millennial
Survey
2015
/
Deloitte
/
Social
impact,
innovation.
Retrieved
from
http://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about
deloitte/articles/millenialsurvey.html
Drayton,
William.
“The
Citizen
Sector
Tranformed”
in
Nicholls,
ed.,
Social

26. 26
Social
Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship:
New
Models
of
Sustainable
Social
Change.
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
2006.
Elkington,
J.,
Hartigan,
P.
(2007)
The
Power
of
Unreasonable
People:
How
Social
Entrepreneurs
Create
Markets
that
Change
the
World.
Boston,
MA:
Harvard
Business
School
Press.
Enactus.
(2015).
Enactus
Canada.
http://enactus.ca/
Finley,
K.
(2015).
The
Crowdfunding
site
that
lets
you
sell
shares
in
your
videogame
or
movie,
Wired.
Wired.
Retrieved
4
April
2015,
from
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/chroma-­‐fund/
Forbat
J.
(2007).
Entreprenuership
:
The
Seeds
of
Success.
Petersfeild:
Harrison
House
Frumkin,
P.
(2003).
Inside
Venture
Philanthropy,
Society,
40(4).
7-­‐15.
Grossberg,
L.
(1994).
The
political
status
of
youth
and
youth
culture.
In
J.S.
Epstein
(ed.),
Adolescents
and
their
music
(pp.25-­‐46).
New
York:
Garland
Press.
Isenberg,
Daniel
(April
23,
2012).
"The
Road
to
Crowdfunding
Hell
–
Daniel
Isenberg
–
Harvard
Business
Review".
Blogs.hbr.org.
Retrieved
August
19,
2012.
Khan
Academy,.
(2015).
Khan
Academy.
Retrived
22
April
2015,
from
https:www.khanacademy.org/about
Lambert,
Thomas,
and
Armin
Schwienbacher.
2010.
“An
Empirical
Analysis
of
Crowdfunding.”
Available
at
SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1578175
Leadbeater,
C.
(1996).
The
Rise
of
the
Social
Entrepreneur,
Demos.
Lewington,
J.
(2013).
Universities
that
teach
you
to
change
the
world.
Globe
and
Mail.
Retrieved
from
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/canadian
university-­‐report/idealist-­‐universities-­‐have-­‐programs-­‐for
you/article14963902/?page=1
Malecki,
E.
J.
(1997).
Technology
and
economic
development:
the
dynamics
of
local,
regional,
and
national
change.University
of
Illinois
at
Urbana-­‐Champaign's
Academy
for
Entrepreneurial
Leadership
Historical
Research
Reference
in
Entrepreneurship.
The
New
Heroes.
(2005)
What
is
Social
Entrepreneurship,
Oregon
Public

27.
Broadcasting.
Ordanini,
A.,
Miceli,
L.,
Pizzetti,
M.,
&
Parasuraman,
A.
(2011).
Crowd-­‐funding:
transforming
customers
into
investors
through
innovative
service
platforms.
Journal
of
service
management,
22(4),
443-­‐470.
Roots
of
Empathy.
(2015)
Home.
http://rootsofempathy.org/
Sagawa,
Shirley,
and
Deb
Jospin.
The
Charasmatic
Organization:
Eight
Ways
to
Grow
a
Nonprofit
That
Builds
Buzz,
Delights
&
Donors,
and
Energizes
Employees.
San
Francisco:
Jossey-­‐Bass,
2008.
Salvationarmyusa.org,.
‘The
Salvation
Army
–
History
of
the
salvation
army’.
N.p.,
2015.
Wed.
6
Mar.
2015
Sherman,
A.,
(2004)
“pros
and
cons
of
receiving
a
government
grant.”
Hudson
Institute.
Teach
for
America.
(2015)
“Our
History”.
https://www.teachforamerica.org/our
organization/our-­‐history
Toms.ca,.
(2015).
TOMS
:
One
For
One.
Retrieved
14
March
2015,
from
http://www.toms.ca/what-­‐we-­‐give
Weiss,
T.,
&
Clark,
H.
(2015).
‘Venture
philanthropy’
is
new
buzz
in
business.
Forbes.
Walkley,
Alison
(2009-­‐11-­‐20).
"TOMS
founder
Mycoskie
comes
to
SHU".
Fairfield
Citizen.
Retrieved
March
14,
2015.