High-Performance Nonprofit Organizations - Assignment Example

Social Entrepreneur Name Institution Course Date of Submission Paper 1(Dr. Pamela Hartigan) Social Entrepreneur The presentation by Dr. Pamela Hartigan was about social entrepreneurship. According to the speaker, social entrepreneurship is the part that entrepreneurs adapt their activities to be unswervingly tied with the definitive objective of making social value. In the process, they habitually act with no intention or little to get personal profit. Converse, Austin (2000) stated that the social entrepreneur mixes an image of business-like discipline with the infatuation of a social mission, determination, and innovation usually associated with, for example, a high-tech pioneer of the Silicon Valley (Austin, 2000, p. 67). In relation to the speaker, utilization of social entrepreneurship term is gaining more popularity. However, uncertainty and confusion are continually noted in relation to what precisely a social entrepreneur is and what it does (Collins, 2004, p. 98) According to Letts (2009) the social entrepreneur term is usually ill-defined, it has no consistent theoretical framework, and it is disjointed (Letts, 2009, p.78). In relation to the presentation, commercial entrepreneurs vary from Social entrepreneurs in that social entrepreneur seek permanently and fundamentally, to change the context that gives rise to the challenges and opportunities for which their solutions are tailored. Different from commercial entrepreneurs, when social entrepreneurs articulate that they desire to toil themselves out of work, thus, social entrepreneurs are not making a persuasive proclamation to sound good, they are simply stating the apparent. The presenter presume that social entrepreneurs are more concerned in understanding the socio-economic, social, cultural, and political context of the predicaments they are trying to resolve more than the customary entrepreneurs. Oster (2007) argued that it is the work of a social entrepreneur to be in front of the line when it is about the social impact of different phenomena, and whether it implies a greater deference to the academic research (Oster, 2007, p. 98). According to the speaker, entrepreneurship is an incomparable set of activities done by people with exceptional or outstanding mind-set so that to maximize profit. Thus, the process is directly linked to success. The presenter used the term exceptional mind-set as a wider term to sum up the characteristics, which shapes the entrepreneurial actions of those people. The speaker distinguished entrepreneurs from other business individuals by incorporating proclamations for instance entrepreneurs usually create needs; whilst business individuals usually satisfy the needs. Entrepreneurs are usually conceptualized as people who visualize the world in a different way and envisage the future better compared to the way others do. Social entrepreneurs grab the opportunities that otherwise would go unseen. They normally accept and perceive risks in a different way than others. The speaker elaborated the uniqueness of the entrepreneurs, as obtained from partial or full definition on opportunity exploitation, venture making, and maximization of the profit. The characteristics underline the economist’s scrutiny of an entrepreneur as the person with an exceptional mind-set; people with that mind-set are viewed as key to undertaking economic opulence and growth maximization (Stevenson, 2007, p.34) Similarly to speaker sediments, social enterprises might be run for non-profit or profit and sit somewhere between an entirely charitable organization and the conventional corporation. Some associations are able to make adequate income via the sale of socially valuable services or goods, however, many are not. Additional funding opportunities comprise donations, corporate investment, and the government funding. Approaching potential investors is a difficult task, in fact, it is even more difficult to persuaded investors if the business is non-profit rather than profit-oriented and not likely to make a return for investors. On the other hand, many donors are skeptical of a social enterprise that is run as a for-profit organization where too much focus may be placed on wealth creation and too little on social value (Letts, 2009, p. 73-74). The speaker mentioned the example of social entrepreneurs that improved the quality of living. From the examples, there were similarities in the characteristics of the social entrepreneur. One of the similarities is that the social enterprise normally delivers more compared commercial value, and it is the extra social value, which frequently ignites the enthusiasm of the social entrepreneur. This in mixture with the idea that social value is not simply measured may make it hard to converse the outcome to donors, investors or the society. It is significant for any business to recognize a long-term stratagem, define opposite objectives, and compel growth in a sustainable way. Complexities for social enterprises once more stem from the reality that the intention of the association is to generate social benefits. It is frequently the case which manifold social benefits may mean numerous goals, all of which should be assessed in provisons of cost to make sure factual value creation. A strong stratagem will recognize an inimitable value proposal contrasted to another association and indicate evidently, what the association will not do. Actions of the social enterprise must work jointly and strengthen each other. The other characteristic identified is remaining true to the Mission. The other mentioned that establishing a good approach for the social enterprise would help to alleviate the likelihood of mission creeps. A successful association will incessantly review approach and work to recover it, bar changes in the mission might cause confusion and influence the association’s impact (Timmons,2006,p.167). List of References Austin, J 2000, The collaboration challenge: How nonprofits and business succeed through strategic alliances, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Collins, M 2004, The enterprising man, East Lansing,. MI, Michigan State University. Letts, GR 2009, High performance nonprofit organizations, Managing upstream for greater impact, New York, Wiley. Oster, M 2007, Strategic management for nonprofit organizations, Theory and cases, New York, Oxford University Press. Stevenson, H 2007, A perspective on entrepreneurship, Harvard Business School Working Paper No, 9-384-131, Boston: Harvard Business School Paper 2 (Dr. Danah Boyd) Social Media According to the speaker (Dr. Danah Boyd), since early ages, teenagers have for all time been engrossed to unrestricted spaces where they can spend time with friends, get new associates, and talk continually with peers regarding matters which concern them, away from additional authority figures and parents. With technology teenagers gathering has been substituted with social media. The speaker does not appreciate the opportunity's youths have during their schooling period to interact. According to the speaker, gatherings are critical for human development; they are how teenagers enlarge their social horizons, share opinions on matters that concern to them, try out with dissimilar versions of their individuality, and create a sense of self-government from other adults and parents that they should in order to turn out to be adults themselves. Therefore, most teenagers share ideas without physically interacting or meeting each other youth hence current interaction is through cyberspace. Dr. Danah Boyd debunks some of the basic myths about technology and youths, which are frequently found in the media or heard in conversations amid adults. One of the myths is that Technology usually creates social isolation among youths. A youngster at a smartphone or computer might look socially isolated, although, more regularly than not, the teenager is utilizing that device to conquer social isolation; the isolation which adults have imposed on youngster. Boyd articulates that she frequently heard parents criticizing that their youths favored computer than to the real populace; however, the teens’ viewpoint was rather different. Teens, across ethnic groups and all over the country, told the speaker repetitively that they had little time to get together with their friends in person. They conversed with their acquaintances via social media, since that was frequently the only means they could reach friends. Contrary Clarke, (2009) believes that teenager has plenty of time to interact with friends, but they rather opt to be enslaved with social media. Boyd established that all parents she conversed with repeatedly supposed they were giving their teens with chances to meet people when they registered them in and drove them to grown-up directed following school activities, but the youths disagreed. Parents told Boyd that the activities offered little chance for the kind of mixing they craved, specifically due to the adult structure and constant adult observation Clarke, 2009, p. 56). The speaker points out that there is the myth that teens are captivated to social media and technology. Boyd established that a number of teens certainly do spend extra time with social media compared to the way they wished. Youths recognized that they are drawn into social media, and they enjoy it until they lose track of time. Therefore, they find no harm subtracting it from the time they could be spending on what activity's adult have been encouraging them to do include schoolwork. Contrary, Qualman, (2009) pointed out that technology and social media has been helpful to youth as it helps them to do schoolwork hence improving their performance (Qualman, 2009, p. 45). According to Boyd, parents believe that the youth nowadays have no gratitude towards privacy. Adults are frequently disgusted by the propensity of youths to post information on the Internet, which must be private. On the contrary, teens frequently told Boyd that they utilized social media in turn to attain privacy. The distinctions seem to be one of concern regarding privacy from whom. Parents worry on the inquisitive eyes of unfamiliar persons while youths are more concerned regarding the prying ears and eyes of adults who are acquainted with them well. In some cases, youths uses social media for their own privacy especially when they are being monitored or watched by their parents or adults. In some instances, youths that were near one another physically will tend to use social media or text rather than converse, specifically so that adults or parents that are actually present will not know or understand what they are talking. Usually youths dislike when their parents read their materials or post online; as they prefer to be read only with their peers. According to Boyd, she talked about network public. According to the speaker, network public among youths is the understanding the public place. The public is structured with technology network, an environment that makes one to be in public. Therefore, network public enables youth to have the feeling that they are in the public although it has boundaries. Contrary, Mandiberg (2012) pointed out that for a youth to feel in public, they should interact with the environment as technologies has boundary (p.67). The speaker also pointed out the four elements that have been crucial to social networking. One of the elements named includes persistence, these implies that what an individual post or put on social media persist for the duration of time. Thus, every statement will remain on social media and can be retrieved easily at any instance. On the other hand, information can only persist is the person that posted the information wishes to let it persist. The other element pointed out with the speaker is the replicable of the information. It implies that information posted by one can be edited with another person, therefore, difficult to differentiate the original work than the edited work. Most of the information has been copied by one then paste or edit them. The other element mentioned by the speaker is the scale liability. In scale liability, an article or information posted on the social media can be viewed with a large number of youths. With the advancement of the technology, majority of youths were able to access internet via smartphones. According Collins, (2004) millions of youths globally are able to access internet and social media. Therefore, information posted on the social media or any website can be viewed by many youths globally. According to Boyd, parents are afraid of their youths from accessing harmful and destructive information from the social media Collins, 2004, p. 89). Contrary Clarke, (2009) pointed out that will the scale liability; most youths can be easily be educated with different information posted on the internet. Another element of social media is about the accessibility of the information (Clarke, 2009, p.89). Unlike when materials are printed on articles, information posted on the internet can be easily accessed with millions of youths globally. Social media has made easy accessibility of information. List of References Clarke, A 2009, Social media, Ottawa, Library of Parliament. Mandiberg, M 2012, The social media reader, New York, New York University Press. Qualman, E 2009, Socialnomics: how social media transforms the way we live and do business, Hoboken. Timmons, B 2006, Venture capital's role in financing innovation for economic growth, Journal of Business Venturing, 1, 161–173. Read More