To classify social entrepreneurial activity is a challenging task, to which the science has so far come in a not so satisfying result. Therefore, together with the netw
ork of Social Business Club Styria we have developed a work model that serves three main differentiation categories:
Does a company / organization / project achieve a social improvement, especially through its core processes? - Social Improvement? Is the primary concern of entrepreneurial activity a social concern? - Social Intention? Where do the money come from? - Cash Flow? First we ask ourselves whether a company, an organization or a project has achieved a social improvement in terms of a problem about its core processes. It should be borne in mind that social improvement as well as what can be identified as a problem situation is very culturally bound and dependent on social standards.
If we see that a company does not tend to effect or improve social improvements, then we ask a question. Whether the company sets CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) activities and understands itself as an actor in a social environment in the sense of corporate citizenship, and is committed to society, eg. About donations or other activities that show a sense of responsibility. Well, it is hardly possible to afford a company today to really put on the tripple bottom line claim "People, Planet, Profit". Companies that are socially committed, i. We call "Responsible Businesses" CSR activities. Organizations that do not do this at all, we refer to as a "Conventional Business", a species that is perceived to be smaller in numbers.
The next question we ask is whether the primary concern or the primary intention of entrepreneurial activity is a social concern. Is there a "social" intention that makes entrepreneurial activity in its core at all? This can be judged, for example, by means of mission statements, models, communication channels, etc., which explain why the entrepreneur, the management team or the managers are "economically" involved. A good example is the chocolatier Josef Zotter. Its clear goal, that is its primary intention is to produce the best chocolates in the world. As a "by-product" - in order to ensure the best quality - he builds "fair relations" with his suppliers as a matter of course. Entrepreneurs / organizations of this type are referred to as "Social Impact Businesses".
If a company or organization has a primary "social" intention, then we ask the source of the cash flow, ie, where the money or sales come from. Here we distinguish between three categories:
In size class 1, we see companies / organizations that generate between 0% and 20% of their sales over the market, that is, (NPOs), civil society organizations (CSOs), or non-governmental organizations (NGOs). They generate between 80% and 100% of their revenues in return for services or products for the common good by public authorities or private philanthropists. Examples of NPOs: Caritas, Doctors Without Borders, Clinic Clowns Examples of CSOs: Voluntary fire brigade, rural youth Examples of NGOs: attac, Amnesty International, WWF
Organizations / Enterprises in size class 2 with sales between 20% and 80% which are made over the market we define "Social Hybrids". As a rule, they use the market principle very well, as well as the commitment of philanthropic and public actors. Examples (with Steiermarkbezug) would be BAN, Bicycle, Atempo
With a market share of 80% to 100% of sales, our class of "Social Businesses" is class 3. They can exist relatively independently of the public hand and legitimize their existence through the principle supply and demand. Examples are, inter alia, Compuritas, Weltläden, a world trade, Grameen Bank, Bonergy