Dear all,
Before talking about Social Return on Investment (SROI) which is due to the whole operation of the social enterprise, let´s start by analyzing the first steps, the very first investments. My last questions in researchgate make me think about the action of social entrepreneurs and I received helpful comments about the question relating the participation of the poor in the process of social innovation. Now, this one is important for nascent social entrepreneurs and for the school of thought (EMES: enterprises owned by the poor, or social and solidarity-based enterprises,must innovate to reach the point of social entrepreneurs).
I mention Social Entrepreneurs to present the top-down approach; NGO and government fall into this group, so I welcome any paper about this fact and especially I would like to see some in depth analysis of the start-up process as suggested by:
Thank you
All the suggested references notwithstanding, it important to note the innovation driven start-ups where cash flow is not a constraint.
Thank you Misra, Dear Charbel. Social Return On Investment (SROI) focus on the cost-benefit analysis to measure social value created by social entrepreneurs, I didn´t see any paper with an evaluation of the start-up process by social entrepreneurs. Start-up requires time, money, energy, analysis for decision. As I mentioned and as we all know, social entrepreneurship is in its infancy and researcher ever analyze start-up for For-profit business. The social entrepreneurs might give up in the start-up process if the cost is very high.
Some likely costs associated to the start-up process for Social Entrepreneurs include:
Production/service cost, tax related system, administrative cost and selling cost, labour cost, operation cost, overhead cost, technological advancement cost, cost of networking and cost of failure. I hope that you may find this useful.
Typically, a regular startup would turn to the following channels of capital: network investments, banking, equity debt, convertible debt, crowdfunding etc., with a relatively straightforward process for funding channels that are revenue options models. However, social ventures do not have the same flexibility in their identity structure on leveraging capital the same way as regular startup ventures do. First, equity or Venture Capital financing usually expects an exit strategy that does not automatically exist in social ventures that plan on generating impact for the long haul. Second, the risk appetite for investors adjusts with the existence of proof of concept models.
However, social ventures exacerbate the challenge of assessing risk, given the unique nature of cultural and business resource issues and investor networks. Thirdly, and most importantly, investors usually depend upon comparable investment activity that helps validate and support an investment thesis around market opportunity and valuation levels. That backup and peer justification does not exist in many social venture markets, where activity is a lot patchier, and those markets have yet to demonstrate clear trends in delivering investor returns. All of this limits the availability of capital in social ventures.
thank you all.
I wish to receive paper comparing start-up from both perspective "top-down with the social entrepreneurs and bottom-up with the agents of change locally-based.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Econ
- Innovation Economics
- Innovation