- What definitely surprised me the most was that there was a classification system for the social responsibility of an enterprise. For instance, in stage two the organization recognizes that it has a social responsibility and it keeps a low profile by donating to well known charities while talking to the public about how they haven't been socially responsible in the past. I wonder why the end stage, stage three, is associated with donating to "controversial" charities? Is social change inherently controversial? Interesting.
2) Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
- I wish the author had explained more about the "heightened sense of accountability" inherent within social entrepreneurship. Like, it makes sense that when you are a social entrepreneur, the people you answer to are those who are affected by your efforts but I wanted that better explained.
3) If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask? Why?
- What are the implications to a social startup's organizational structure and/or processes with the heightened sense of of accountability? I am interested in starting my own non-profit so I want to know the answer to this question for the benefit of my future nonprofit.
- What's the difference between a social enterprise and a nonprofit? I don't think this is clearly stated in the reading.
4) Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree with what she or he said? How?
- I would disagree with the author when he or she states that a key part of having an environmental strategy is promoting diversity. I know a big problem in the environmental community is that it is largely white, upper-middle class people that can afford to care about the environment. I think that an environmental strategy should include promoting diversity but that's not usually reflected in real life.
No comments:
Post a Comment