Being a relatively new concept, evolved and compiled from the concepts of businesspeople, social change, and innovation, Social Entrepreneurship is difficult to properly define and pinpoint. David Bornstein, in his blog post, The Rise of the Social Entrepreneur, addresses not only the misconception many people hold about social entrepreneurs, but also explores who these social entrepreneurs are and how they function.

Many people tend to think of social entrepreneurs simply as businesspeople who address problems, while Bornstein identifies them as any citizen who strives for progress and change- “to address problems more successfully than the past”.

Agreeing with much of what Bornstein has to say, the idea that social entrepreneurs go beyond the business and political world, into the everyday lives of any and all citizens is valid. Such a new movement must strike a different path than the others, and push past the typical boundaries of entrepreneurship. Being that entrepreneurship has connotations of innovation, the social aspect, to me, not only indicates that the goal is to impact communities, but that it is the raw community itself making the change.

For businesses, increasing focus and importance is being put on social responsibility, resulting in yet another thing to consider when making large decisions: how their actions will affect the rest of the community.

In Steve McKee’s article “Corporate Social Responsibility: Distinction or Distraction?”, he states that businesses have to decide to be either responsible to their stakeholders or to the rest of society, while leaning towards the former. He cautions that large issues like world hunger are distractions to businesses and that they should not address issues not directly related to the company.

However, I believe that businesses should always consider how their actions and movements would affect the greater population, or find a compromise of the two. Businesses cannot prosper without the support of society, and need to consider how their actions will affect others.

Supported by Mannat Cheema’s blog , ‘5 Hour Energy’, there is a growing need for businesses to voluntarily act ethically with their growing prominence in societies.  Having so much influence on what people buy, their jobs, working conditions, and lifestyles requires a degree of responsibility to aid the growth of society positively.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-08-09/corporate-social-responsibility-distinction-or-distraction

With new products such as the pink, skin protecting Honda Fit “She’s” model, and the new Bic “For Her” pen highlighted in Susan Krashinsky’s article Surge in gender-targeted products creates marketing headaches for companies, we can see how these companies view women, and separate men’s and women’s products. The article highlights the various products companies are aiming at women, and their ineffective ways of advertising them. When trying to direct products towards the women consumer category, companies seem to focus on making things pink, and pretty, assuming that that is what attracts women.

In our social culture today, these tactics are not only ineffective, but also off-putting. Though this form of advertising could attract some people, in our society today, at least where these products are marketed, are filled with successful women who desire more than pink accessories.

Women are a very large consumer group, which is important to target.  With the higher status of women in our society today, and the thinning divides of gender roles, companies should shift their marketing strategies to play on the success and value of women rather than assuming they have a desire to look pretty with a pink pen. Seeing these companies’ views of women through their forms of advertisement is off-putting and would not attract me to buying their products.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/marketing/surge-in-gender-targeted-products-creates-marketing-headaches-for-companies/article5358521/

Big companies, with the right resources and capital, are able to find target markets internationally and expand their businesses there in order to increase profit and efficiency. Contrastingly, it is also possible to acquire businesses internationally and have them incorporated into local firms. Many smaller Canadian firms have begun to do this, some with decent rewards, others with complications. Buying foreign firms a growing path to expansion, by Caitlin Crawshaw explores various small businesses that found advantages in buying struggling firms overseas.

Not all firms function in the same way, and larger firms definitely differ from smaller ones in term of capital, resources, and employment. The limited resources that some small companies face lead them to make large, and often risky, decisions with the hopes of success. As shown in the article, Angel Accessibility Solutions is a company in Victoria suffering losses due to the decreasing supply from the manufacturers of the products they sold. As a result, in order to save their company, the accessibility solutions company bought the manufacturers who product they distributed. This move can be criticized as risky and un-worthwhile, yet I believe is necessary in certain circumstances. Acquiring this overseas company gave Angel the ability to control product manufacturing, a solid international base, and growth to their company.

In all business, large scale or small, risks have to be taken in order to grow and prosper. Each firm has to strategically identify its issues, and the appropriate steps for economic growth.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/small-business/sb-growth/going-global/buying-foreign-firms-a-growing-path-to-expansion/article4609615/

Should clothing companies be responsible for censoring messages their item promote, or should buyers use their discretion? Anna Zhao’s post about using controversy as marketing (and essentially marketing controversy), points out the interesting fact that amidst the controversy and arguable negative messages being promoted, Urban Outfitters in a leading competitor in its market.

Urban outfitters isn’t known for it conservative styles or typical slogans, rather, its unique for its out-going styles and questionable messages, and uses these as a brand positioning technique. UO definitely uses its controversial nature to a) differ itself from the other competitors, and b) establish its own target market in which it can succeed. Its unique style and messages purposely target teens, known for going through the typical ‘rebellious’ stage. Focusing on a particular consumer group (though attracting other consumers as well) with such a specific genre of clothing answers Anna Zhou’s previous question of how UO can be doing so well amidst all the competition and resentment from certain groups.

Urban outfitters has always counted on a certain target group of people for its revenue, and it’s their strategic marketing techniques, no matter how unconventional (in this case, the more controversial the better, it seems), that let them still strive in the clothing market.