Malazan Empire: Social Business Entrepeneurs? - Malazan Empire

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Social Business Entrepeneurs?

#1 User is offline   Aimless 

  • First Sword
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 539
  • Joined: 08-February 03

Posted 22 June 2008 - 09:19 AM

When it comes to matters of finance and economics, I am very naïve and uninformed.

When I come across an idea in those areas, I usually find myself unable to assess it properly. The following is such an idea, and I was wondering if you folks could help me analyse what he's saying in an objective way!

I think what I was most struck by was the notion that we often strive to change reality to better suit the theory, rather than the other way around. Apart from that, I know nothing, get nothing :(

Thanks in advance :p

-- P

http://www.grameen-info.org/bank/socialbus...trepreneurs.htm

Quote

Social Business Entrepreneurs
Are the Solution

Muhammad Yunus

Capitalism is Interpreted too Narrowly

Many of the problems in the world remain unresolved because we continue to interpret capitalism too narrowly. In this narrow interpretation we create a one-dimensional human being to play the role of entrepreneur. We insulate him from other dimensions of life, such as, religious, emotional, political dimensions. He is dedicated to one mission in his business life ---- to maximize profit. He is supported by masses of one-dimensional human beings who back him up with their investment money to achieve the same mission. The game of free market works out beautifully with one-dimensional investors and entrepreneurs. We have remained so mesmerised by the success of the free market that we never dared to express any doubt about it. We worked extra hard to transform ourselves, as closely as possible, into the one-dimensional human beings as conceptualised in theory to allow smooth functioning of free market mechanism.

Economic theory postulates that you are contributing to the society and the world in the best possible manner if you just concentrate on squeezing out the maximum for yourself. When you get your maximum, everybody else will get their maximum.

As we devotedly follow this policy sometimes doubts appear in our mind whether we are doing the right thing. Things don't look too good around us. We quickly brush off our doubts by saying all these bad things happen because of "market failures"; well-functioning market cannot produce unpleasant results.

I think things are going wrong not because of "market failure". It is much deeper than that. Let us be brave and admit that it is because of "conceptualisation failure". More specifically, it is the failure to capture the essence of a human being in our theory. Everyday human beings are not one-dimensional entities, they are excitingly multi-dimensional and indeed very colourful. Their emotions, beliefs, priorities, behaviour patterns can be more aptly described by drawing analogy with the basic colours and millions of colours and shades they produce.

Social Business Entrepreneurs Can Play a Big Role in the Market

Suppose we postulate a world with two kinds of people, both one-dimensional, but having different objectives. One type is the existing type, i.e. profit maximizing type. Second type is a new type, who are not interested in profit-maximization. They are totally committed to make a difference to the world. They are social-objective driven. They want to give better chance in life to other people. They want to achieve their objective through creating/supporting sustainable business enterprises. Their businesses may or may not earn profit, but like any other businesses they must not incur losses. They create a new class of business which we may describe as "non-loss" business.

Can we find second type of people in the real world ? Yes, we can. Aren't we familiar with "do-gooders" ? Do-gooders are the same people who are referred to as "social entrepreneurs" in formal parlance. Social entrepreneurism is an integral part of human history. Most people take pleasure in helping others. All religions encourage this quality in human beings. Governments reward them by giving tax breaks. Special legal facilities are created for them so that they can create legal entities to pursue their objectives.

Some social entrepreneurs (SE) use money to achieve their objectives, some just give away their time, labour, talent, skill or such other contributions which are useful to others. Those who use money may or may not try to recover part or all of the money they put into their work by charging fee or price.

We may classify the SEs, who use money, into four types :
i) No cost recovery
ii) Some cost recovery
iii) Full cost recovery
iv) More than full cost-recovery

Once a SE operate at 100% or beyond the cost recovery point he has entered the business world with limitless possibilities. This is a moment worth celebrating. He has overcome the gravitational force of financial dependence and now is ready for space flight ! This is the critical moment of significant institutional transformation. He has moved from the world of philanthropy to the world of business. To distinguish him from the first two types of SEs listed above, we'll call him "social business entrepreneur" (SBE).

With the introduction of SBEs, the market place becomes more interesting and competitive. Interesting because two different kinds of objectives are now at play creating two different sets of frameworks for price determination. Competitive because there are more players now than before. These new players can be equally aggressive and enterprising in achieving their goals as the other entrepreneurs.

SBEs can become very powerful players in the national and international economy. Today if we add up the assets of all the SBEs of the world, it would not add up to even an ultra-thin slice of the global economy. It is not because they basically lack growth potential, but because conceptually we neither recognised their existence, nor made any room for them in the market. They are considered freaks, and kept outside the mainstream economy. We do not pay any attention to them, because our eyes are blinded by the theories taught in our schools.

If SBEs exist in the real world, it makes no sense why we should not make room for them in our conceptual framework. Once we recognise them supportive institutions, policies, regulations, norms, and rules will come into being to help them become mainstream.

Market is always considered to be an utterly incapable institution to address social problems. To the contrary, market is recognised as an institution significantly contributing to creating social problems (environmental hazards, inequality, health, unemployment, ghettoes, crimes, etc.). Since market has no capacity to solve social problem, this responsibility is handed over to the State. This arrangement was considered as the only solution until command economies were created where State took over everything, abolishing market.

But this did not last long. With command economies gone we are back to the artificial division of work between the market and the State. In this arrangement market is turned into an exclusive playground of the personal gain seekers, overwhelmingly ignoring the common interest of communities and the world as a whole.

With the economy expanding at an unforeseen speed, personal wealth reaching unimaginable heights, technological innovations making this speed faster and faster, globalisation threatening to wipe out the weak economies and the poor people from the economic map, it is time to consider the case of SBEs more seriously than we did ever before. Not only is it not necessary to leave the market solely to the personal-gain seekers, it is extremely harmful to mankind as a whole to do that. It is time to move away from the narrow interpretation of capitalism and broaden the concept of market by giving full recognition to SBEs. Once this is done SBEs can flood the market and make the market work for social goals as efficiently as it does for personal goals.

Social Stock Market

How do we encourage creation of SBEs ? What are the steps that we need to take to facilitate the SBEs to take up bigger and bigger chunks of market share ?

First, we must recognise the SBEs in our theory. Students must learn that businesses are of two kinds : a) business to make money, and :mad: business to do good to others. Young people must learn that they have a choice to make --- which kind of entrepreneur they would like to be ? If we broaden the interpretation of capitalism even more, they'll have wider choice of mixing these two basic types in proportions just right for their own taste.

Second, we must make the SBEs and social business investors visible in the market place. As long as SBEs operate within the cultural environment of present stock markets they'll remain restricted by the existing norms and lingo of trading. SBEs must develop their own norms, standards, measurements, evaluation criteria, and terminology. This can be achieved only if we create a separate stockmarket for social business enterprises and investors. We can call it Social Stock Market. Investors will come here to invest their money for the cause they believe in, and in the company they think is doing the best in achieving a particular mission. There may be some companies listed in this social stock market who are excellent in achieving their mission at the same time making very attractive profit on the side. Obviously these companies will attract both kinds of investors, social-goal oriented as well as personal-gain oriented.

Making profit will not disqualify an enterprise to be a social business enterprise. Basic deciding factor for this will be whether the social goal remains to be enterprise's over-arching goal, and it is clearly reflected in its decision-making. There will be well-defined stringent entry and exit criteria for a company to qualify to be listed in the social stock market and to lose that status. Soon companies will emerge which will succeed in mixing both social goal and personal goal. There will be decision-rules to decide upto what point they still qualify to enter the social stock market, and at what point they must leave it. Investors must remain convinced that companies listed in the social stock market are truly social business enterprises.

Along with the creation of the Social Stock Market we'll need to create rating agencies, appropriate impact assessment tools, indices to understand which social business enterprise is doing more and/or better than others --- so that social investors are correctly guided. This industry will need its Social Wall Street Journal and Social Financial Times to bring out all the exciting, as well as the terrible, news stories and analyses to keep the social entrepreneurs and investors properly informed and forewarned.

Within business schools we can start producing social MBAs to meet the demand of the SBEs as well as preparing young people to become SBEs themselves. I think young people will respond very enthusiastically to the challenge of making serious contributions to the world by becoming SBEs.
We'll need to arrange financing for SBEs. New bank branches specialising in financing social business ventures will have to come up. New "angels" will have to show up on the scene. Social Venture Capitalists will have to join hands with the SBEs.

How to Make a Start

One good way to get started with creating social business enterprises would be to launch a design competition for social business enterprises. There can be local competition, regional competition and global competition. Prizes for the successful designs will come in the shape of financing for the enterprises, or as partnership for implementing the projects.

All submitted social business proposals can be published so that these can become the starting points for the designers in the next cycles, or ideas for someone who wants to start a social business enterprise.

Social Stock Market itself can be started by a SBE as social business enterprise. One business school, or several business schools can join hands to launch this as a project and start serious business transactions.

Let us not expect that a social business enterprise will come up, from its very birth, with all the answers to a social problem. Most likely, it will proceed in steps. Each step may lead to the next level of achievement. Grameen Bank is a good example in this regard. In creating Grameen Bank I never had a blue-print to follow. I moved one step at a time, always thinking this step will be my last step. But it was not. That one step led me to another step, a step which looked so interesting that it was difficult to walk away from. I faced this situation at every turn.

I started my work by giving small amount of money to a few poor people without any collateral. Then I realised how good the people felt about it. I needed more money to expand the programme. To access bank money, I offered myself as a guarantor. To get support from another bank, I converted my project as the bank's project. Later, I turned it into central bank project. Over time I saw that the best strategy would be to create an independent bank to do the work that we do. So we did. We converted the project into a formal bank, borrowing money from the central bank to lend money to the borrowers. Since donors became interested in our work, and wanted to support us, we borrowed and received grants from international donors. At one stage we decided to be self-reliant. This led us to focus on generating money internally by collecting deposits. Now Grameen Bank has more money in deposits than it lends out to borrowers. It lends out half a billion dollars a year, in loans averaging under $ 200, to 4.5 million borrowers, without collateral, and maintains 99 per cent repayment record.

We introduced many programmes in the bank --- housing loans, student loans, pension funds, loans to purchase mobile phones to become the village telephone ladies, loans to beggars to become door-to-door salesman. One came after another.

If we create the right environment, SBEs can take up significant market share and make the market an exciting place for fighting social battles in ever innovative and effective ways.

Lets get serious about social business entrepreneurs. They can brighten up this gloomy world.



[About Grameen] [Bank] [Family] [Microcredit] [Newsletter] [FeedBack]
Trademarks & Copyright © 1998 Grameen Communications last modified on 20-August, 2005.


Also:

http://en.wikipedia....Social_business

0

#2 User is offline   Binder of Demons 

  • Lord of Light
  • View gallery
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 1,617
  • Joined: 02-March 07
  • Location:Ireland
  • - Thread Killer -

Posted 22 June 2008 - 02:04 PM

Muhammad Yunus is an absolute legend. One of the most deserving Nobel prize winners I can think of (puts the notion of Al Gore getting one to shame).
Micro finance has been an amazing benefit to some of the poorest areas of the world, and shows what ground level investment can do for some of these communities. This is in stark contrast to the idea of wealthy countries pledging huge sums of cash to a developing nation, but tying that money to a specific short term project. But I digress.

Not really sure what there is to say about the article. He's basically trying to point out that you can have a socially aware business model, and be successful. You don't need to be either a rampant capitalist, gaining profit for yourself at the expense of everyone else, OR a do-gooder that shuns the notion of business as a necessary evil.

Why can't businesses have positive social goals, AND seek to gain profit. A part of the problem is that if a social business is non profit it probably doesn't have the same access to investors as a purely profit driven company does. But if you have a new breed of social business entrepreneur, who's companies will balance the idea of profit and social improvement, then it would be good to provide a framework by which these could compete more favourably. Hence the social stock market, where investors can see them more readily.

I think a lot of the ideas behind social business enterprises comes from seeing the poor business practices of many charitable organisations in the past. So many of these wasted money terribly in a manner that would never have been tolerated in a profit driven business. But fortunately, most of the NGO's and various charitable organisations around the world are learning from their mistakes (for the most part). And now at last, you are getting a happy medium of these social business enterprises. And as far as I know, there have already been several competitions and awards for socially aware businesses in Britain alone in the last few years.

I heard an interesting interview with an entrepreneur recently who fits this model (though they were calling it ethical business). He runs a coffee bean importing business. Now in the interview he mentions that he wanted to improve the lot of the farmers that he deals with, but wouldn't sign up for the FAIR TRADE status. His reasoning was the thr fair trade stamp, simply menas that the workers get a minimum fixed price for their coffee, but that gives him no guarantee of a quality product. So instead, he went to Central America, met some of the local growers, tried their beans, and found his top quality product. And because his is an ethical business, he paid them very well (relatively) for this quality. Because of this fair treatment, word has spread, and other growers have since been recruited, but again it requires a quality product. As a result, the local growers are being paid far better than the fair trade equivalent. The reason this story resonated with me, was that I have tried buying Fair Trade coffee here in New Zealand and it tasted like muck, and as a result I stopped getting it. However, if it tasted just as good, i'd be happy to pay a bit more. I'll see if i can find the link to the interview.

But anyway, I ramble. Cheers for posting the article. It was nice to read up on that stuff again.

Hopefully there are some business people here who can shed some actual light on the article for you. (Since I have no business background, and am just interested in the idea of social entrepreneurship)

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt - Mark Twain

Never argue with an idiot!
They'll drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience!
- Anonymous
0

#3 User is offline   MrXIII 

  • Blunt Claw
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 212
  • Joined: 25-April 06
  • Interests:Vital existence

Posted 22 June 2008 - 11:21 PM

Cheers for posting this Aimless I really enjoyed reading it.

My thoughts on the article;

I like his idea that it is possible to have social issues taken out of the hands of the state. What I took from this was a more realistic look at doing "good" than you usually find in economics. If the buisness is breaking even, or heading that way with little support from a financial institution (state/loan etc) then what we have is a more efficient and more desirable way of engineering social good than state controll. Mainly because people will support the ideal (And the buisness representing it) that they want, it wont be what the state thinks we want.

He says;

"There may be some companies listed in this social stock market who are excellent in achieving their mission at the same time making very attractive profit on the side. Obviously these companies will attract both kinds of investors, social-goal oriented as well as personal-gain oriented."

This strikes me as the most desireble situation. This buisness while socially minded is far from a charity case. Not that breaking even is a bad thing, so long as the idea of loss avoidance is maintained (and since this is a private enterprise thats a must.) and the buisness continues to break even (though a small profit would be better for stability and what not.).

Must say I was pleasantly supprised, I'm a strong supporter of market capitalism and usually the minute the word social pops into a paper on economics/buisness bad things happen. This however is a realistic, infact damn impressive way of bringing socially minded issues into a market structure, cutting out the gross inefficiency that leaving anything in the hands of the state (at least in this little nation) tends to cause.

I'll maybe say something more coherant later.
0

#4 User is offline   Aimless 

  • First Sword
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 539
  • Joined: 08-February 03

Posted 23 June 2008 - 12:15 AM

Thanks for the replies guys, they're helping me think through this, and they're interesting as well! :(

Quote

I think a lot of the ideas behind social business enterprises comes from seeing the poor business practices of many charitable organisations in the past. So many of these wasted money terribly in a manner that would never have been tolerated in a profit driven business.


So this is a way in which competition and the free market can bring about social progress? By forcing/allowing entrepeneurs to compete in doing good efficiently? :mad:

The "only" major change would be to introduce a different kind of profit/currency. It doesn't go against a free market philosophy, it just makes a new market.

Okay, it's beginning to make more sense to me, now!



MrXIII: I'm still trying to figure out how (and how much!) this would differ from the practice of a state contracting out eg. transportation, healthcare, etc. to private entrepeneurs.

Specifically, I'm trying to imagine the consequences--political and social, primarily!--of this!

MrXIII;336502 said:

Mainly because people will support the ideal (And the buisness representing it) that they want, it wont be what the state thinks we want.


Quote

This however is a realistic, infact damn impressive way of bringing socially minded issues into a market structure, cutting out the gross inefficiency that leaving anything in the hands of the state (at least in this little nation) tends to cause.


When I first read it, I appreciated it as a nice mission-statement that I agreed with on an ideological level (ie. I believe that everyone should take social responsibility and businesses are no exception), and his vision of a future social business market as being a gimmick of sorts, an extreme vision designed to be evocative and provocative. It's only now that I'm beginning to appreciate the other aspects! So thank you :p

I am a big fan of cross-pollination, and I've posted this thread on one other forum so far: http://www.ataricomm...ad.php?t=647969 (enjoy!)

0

#5 User is offline   MrXIII 

  • Blunt Claw
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 212
  • Joined: 25-April 06
  • Interests:Vital existence

Posted 23 June 2008 - 10:43 PM

I'll need to look at the posts in the other forum some of them seem interesting. For the mean time I'll add something here.

Aimless;336516 said:

MrXIII: I'm still trying to figure out how (and how much!) this would differ from the practice of a state contracting out eg. transportation, healthcare, etc. to private entrepeneurs.

Specifically, I'm trying to imagine the consequences--political and social, primarily!--of this!


I guess what I was thinking is the removal of inefficiency.

Not the best example, but the only one I can think of (bare with me). I was reading Naked Economics (good book) and it has a chapter on Mohair farmers. Essentially the Federal goverment pays out a ton of cash to people who farm a product that isn't exactly viable economically anymore. However they are loud, and no-one is particularly opposed to them so not wanting to alienate a strong oppinion group (and loose vote) the goverment continues to pay money to a cause most of their country men don't give a damn about.

This unfortunately is how a lot of Goverment spending seems to be allocated. It's to keep smaller numbers of loud people quiet so they don't upset the voting population at large (okay a bit overstated I admit.). The discussion over moskito security devices is an example (some small minority of people with disabled conections (I hesitate to say relatives... some people are just flag wavers in any camp.) are lobbying in the UK, if the goverment opposes them it wont look good "we're pro torturing the mentally ill".) so a social good (dispersion of thugs, public safety) and a financial one (the poor manufactuers) are potentially going to be overturned by a small minority of loud angry people.

If however the goverment had no controll over such social issues and they were handled by social buisness entreprenures (Ah finally I stop rambling and get to my point.), if you have a buisness devoted to supporting the way of life of the Mohair farmer, it has to argue it's case to the market, maybe even find alternative uses for producing whatever they actually produce. Then if enough people care and invest in this company then the Mohair farmer is saved, if not then clearly its a non-issue and they have to move on like everyone who doesn't look good on a news bullitin ("These poor insurance brokers, are destitute their way of life ruined, this man can hardly afford to have his Armani suit pressed" Doesn't have the same ring to it.).

While I sound cynical consider the plus side, the money no longer being taken off tax-payers for social issues makes the population as a whole better off. If they are then inspired (and you'd hope we're not all heartless money grabbing buggers.) to spend money on the SBE they want to see supported. The majority is heard, and the power is taken out of the hands of the small loud groups that seem to be the bane of the tax paying man. We have the social goods people actually want. SBE's arn't idealistic money traps they need to actually work and justify themselves to the public.

Anyway I realise I stopped making any sort of sense around "bare with me". I have to say I'm really taken with this idea (damn you Aimless I've allways prided myself on my heartless capitalist side.... the market isn't supposed to care! *sigh*).
0

#6 User is offline   Binder of Demons 

  • Lord of Light
  • View gallery
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 1,617
  • Joined: 02-March 07
  • Location:Ireland
  • - Thread Killer -

Posted 24 June 2008 - 04:20 PM

It's been a while since i listened to several of these but, here are some links to a podcast for small businesses and entrepreneurs, called smallbizpod.co.uk
While i'm not a business person, I find the podcast to be interesting and usually have some good tips on starting out in business.

A few of the podcasts deal with issues related to social business entrepreneurship. They're not all strictly what is outlined above in the article you posted, but they do cover similar ground. The most appropriate podcasts being

#29 http://www.smallbizpod.co.uk/2006/07/06/sm...-2006/#comments
SmallBizPod #29, the podcast for startups and small businesses, this week includes an interview from roving reporter Carl Barton who talks to coffee entrepreneur, Steve Leighton of hasbean.co.uk about the practicalities of importing goods, ethical business and his passion for coffee. The show also includes a round up of listener comments including an audio [...]

#40 http://www.smallbizpod.co.uk/2007/02/13/sm...-february-2007/
This week SmallBizPod #40, the small business podcast, explores the subject of support for environmentally friendly businesses, how going green can benefit your bottom line and the world of social enterprise. Interviews with Hugh Smith of London Remade and Colin Crooks, managing director of Greenworks, provide a fascinating insight and plenty of practical advice. [...]

#62 http://www.smallbizpod.co.uk/2008/02/27/sm...2-social-firms/
The positive impact of social firms including interviews with Sally Reynolds, ceo of Social Firms UK and Nigel Kershaw, chairman of The Big Issue and ceo of Big Issue Invest.

#70 http://www.smallbizpod.co.uk/2008/06/24/sm...eurial-journey/
Interview with Gitanjali Banerjee Bhattacharya & Kaustav Bhattacharya about an extraordinary entrepreneurial train journey in India, what it hopes to achieve and how grass roots business can inspire social change.

Podcast #29 is the coffee one i mentioned earlier, and Podcast #70 only came out today so i haven't listened to it yet but it looks to be pretty much what we're talking about. The podcasts are available off his website, or from iTunes. They're usually 15-20mb.

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt - Mark Twain

Never argue with an idiot!
They'll drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience!
- Anonymous
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users