Article Review

Prepared By:
Sahitya Shrestha
School of Management
MBA GLM
Roll No. 15

Submitted to:
Prof. Dr. Gangaram Bishwakarma

May 20, 2021

 Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship:
Same, Different or Both?
James Austin, Howard Stevendon
and Jane Wei-Skillern

Introduction
An individual with an innovative ideas and leadership skills and manages to utilize the available
resources with the goal of pulling maximum returns on investment is characterized by
entrepreneur. With the change in calender, the defination of entrepreneurship has also been
described with broader sense. The trending two main types of entrepreneurship are commercial
and social entrepreneurship. The social entrepreneurship is the entrepreneurial activity that
travels on the highway of business world, aiming social mission as the primary destination
whereas the commercial entrepreneurship’s destination is the maximization of the return on the
investment of the shareholders and investors. This is the common difference that we have in our
mindset. This article expresses the differences and the commonalities between them with respect
to other dimensions.

Thematic Review
The article dipicts the similiarities and dissimiliarities between the commercial and social
entrepreneurship with reference to the comparative analysis carried out. It provides the new
vision to view the entrepreneurship. It can be found thtat this article more focuses on the social
entrepreneurship than the other. It provides new sight to twinkle in the market in the field of
social entrepreneurship in an effective and systemmatic manner. The article presents the theory
of social entrepreneurship and the theory of change. The author stands on the defination of
entrepreneurship given by the Steveson (1983) which says, “The pursuit of opportunity beyond
the tangible resources that you can currently control.” The author has related social
entrepreneurship with the above defination.
The article has presented the commonalities and differences focusing on four different variables.
The first variable is the market failure which says that commercial entrepreneurship is the cause
of the evolution of the social entrepreneurship. The commercial entrepreneurship forces fails to
meet the social need through its supply and operation and this types of failure or challenges are
the twinkling opportunities for the social entrepreneurs. The second one is mission, which is
clear. The mission of social entrepreneur is the creation of social value whereas wealth creation
is of the others. Resource allocation is the third variable, in which the scare and the human
resource are allocated with the remunaration of cash and non cash (nonpecuniary) compensation.
The expected return from the investment is different. The final comparision variable is the
performance measurement, where it has been showed that the progress in commercial
entrepreneurship can be seen in the annual reports and in the market too but the social progress
brought through the social entrrepreneurship is nonquantifiable.
The article has presented the entreprreneurial model with four interrelated components. The
components are People, Context, Deal and Opportunity (PCDO). The name of the model is
PCDO Model. The article has shown the application of this model in social entrepreneuship. The
article has has shown the interrelation of the components in a very clear format.
The article shows the way ‘how’ and ‘with what intension’ the People are to be a part of the
social enterprise. The human resources are recruited to meet the goal of an organization. But the
goal is different in both the entrepreneurship. Both type of entrepreneurship require the human
resources but the return or remuneration those resources get are are different. The social
enterprise’s human resources donot get the salary as per the market value. Most of the human
resources gets the non cash remuneration. But for-profit oraganization gets the competitive
salary.
The other component described is Context, which highlight the nature or the field of operation of
the operation as per the nature of the field of operation the leaders should know the componet
that effects the enterprise. The leader should know the laws related to it and should have concern
on it too. Otherwise it may be presented as the threat for the organization in future and for the
non profit social enterprise it is very difficult to exist in the market.
Deal, which means the contract. It has the separate value in the market for the organization. A
leader should have the position or the value which can be sold in the market. The leader of the
organization should have the trust on the market as he/she have to invite or make people belief
that he can make a change.
Opportunity always relies on the market. But its identification and value always depends on the
leader who identifies it. Some opportunities can bring the negative result. So the mind of the
leader should have to think through diverse dimennsion and to the long extent. The current
growth may be the approach challenges in the future like the KaBOOM organization as
mentioned in the article.

Conclusion
The main differrence that social entrepreneurship and commercial entrepreneurship have is the
mission of the enterprise. But there are other dimensions that make the differences in the
operation of the enterprise. The resources required for the operation is same but its allocation for
the goal achievement is different.

Lesson learned
The alignment of the Social Value Proposition plays an important role in the organization. The
opportunitiy lies not only inside the organization but also outside the organizational boundaries.
The short term growth is not only the thing to make the prosperity but the longetivity of the
enterprise can meet the success. PCDO Model has made the clear understanding between the
components and its interrelation.