1

Managing Social Enterprise Organizations

Semester: Fall 2015

Class meeting time: T/Th 10:10-11:30 am

Classroom: Evans Hall #4430

Professor: Kate Cooney, Ph.D. (kate.cooney@yale.edu)

Office hours: Thursdays 12:15-1:30pm, by appointment

Office 5th

floor North side, #5218

This course provides the opportunity to examine, through a set of case studies, key issues related

to managing social enterprise organizations. Following initial content reviewing perspectives on

the trend of social enterprise, topics covered include: industry analysis for organizations with a

double or triple bottom line, stakeholder analysis, organizational design (choosing the right

organizational legal form), the challenge of integrating interdisciplinary human resources, using

metrics for performance management, calculating a SROI (social return on investment), raising

capital at different stages of the organizational lifecycle, scaling a social innovation/ product, and

protecting social mission during exits.

Syllabus:

Date Topic Readings Case/Assignments/Guests

1 9/3 Introduction to

course:

What is Social

Enterprise?

Alter, S. K. (2006). Social

enterprise models and their mission

and money relationships. In A.

Nicholls (Ed.), Social

Entrepreneurship: New Models of

Sustainable Social Change (pp.

205-232). New York: Oxford

University Press.

Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J.,

Dorsey, C. (2012) In Search of the

Hybrid Ideal. Stanford Social

Innovation Review, Summer.

Santos, F., Pache, A. C., &

Birkholz, C. (2015). Making

Hybrids Work. California

Management Review, 57(3), 36-58.

Reading discussion Qs:

1) Review the Alter article, think

of a social enterprise that you are

familiar with—which model does

it follow? Do the pros and cons

described by Alter for this model

correspond with your experience?

Be prepared to talk about it in

class.

2

2 9/8 Industry

Analysis,

Competitive

Strategy and

Social

Enterprise

Porter, M.E. (2008) The Five

Competitive Forces that Shape

Strategy. Harvard Business Review

(HBR)

Porter, M.E. (1996) What is

Strategy? HBR.

CASE#1 –Zara and Fast Fashion

CASE#2- Veja: Sneakers with a

Conscience

Reading discussion Qs:

1) Drawing on Porter (2008),

analyze the five forces in the fast

fashion industry from Zara’s

perspective. How did Zara’s

practices differ from rivals in the

fashion industry? What is Zara’s

strategic position and competitive

advantage?

2) Zara is not a social enterprise.

This case sets the stage at the

industry level for understanding

the forces an SE must contend

with in launching a business with

social dimensions. What are the

opportunities for social value

creation in the fashion industry?

3) Drawing on the Porter

readings, compare the five forces

in the eco-fashion business vs.

fast fashion and describe Veja’s

competitive strategy.

3 9/10 Stakeholder

Analysis and

the Ecosystem

Perspective

Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., &

Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a

theory for stakeholder identification

and salience: Defining the principle

of who and what really counts.

Academy of Management Review,

22(4), 853-886.

Bloom, Paul N. & Dees, G. (2008).

Cultivate your Ecosystem. Stanford

Social Innovation Review, Winter

Dorado, Sylvia. (2006). Social

entrepreneurial ventures: Different

values so different process of

creation, no? Journal of

Developmental Entrepreneurship,

11(4), 319-343.

Kumar, P., Dass, M., & Kumar, S.

(2015). From competitive

advantage to nodal advantage:

Ecosystem structure and the new

five forces that affect

prosperity. Business Horizons.

Reading Discussion Qs:

1) Drawing on Dorado, how do

the entrepreneurial processes of

opportunity spotting, resource

development and organization

building differ for Veja vs. Zara?

2) Drawing on Bloom and Dees

article, create an eco-map for

Veja Sneakers company.

1) 3) Drawing on the Mitchell, Agle,

& Wood article, prepare a

stakeholder analysis on the Veja

case.

2)

3

4 9/15 Organizational

Structure &

Multiple

Institutional

Logics

Depedri, S. (2010) The competitive

advantages of social enterprises,

pp.34-54 in Becchetti, L. and

Borzaga, C. The Economics of

Social Responsibility: The World of

Social Enterprises, New York:

Routledge.

Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010).

Building sustainable hybrid

organizations: The case of

commercial microfinance

organizations. Academy of

Management Journal, 53(6), 1419-

1440.

Besharov, Marya. (2013). The

relational ecology of identification:

How organizational identification

emerges when individuals hold

divergent values. Academy of

Management Journal, amj-2011.

Reading Discussion Qs:

1) 1) What are the competitive

advantages of SEs, according to

Depedri?

2) What is the management

challenge that the Battilana &

Dorado article centers on? In the

Battilana & Dorado article, how

do the two MFIs differ in terms of

their hiring and socialization

policies? How generalizable do

you think these findings are?

2) 3) What does the Besharov study

findings add to our knowledge

about hiring and socialization

policies in hybrid SE

organizations? How

generalizable do you think these

findings are? Can you imagine

exporting them to a SE setting

that you are familiar with?

3) 4) Assignment 1 small groups-be

prepared to discuss your project

for assignment #1

4)

5 9/17 Nonprofits and

Social

Enterprise

Cooney, K. (2006). The

institutional and technical

structuring of nonprofit ventures:

Case study of a US hybrid

organization caught between two

fields.Voluntas: International

Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit

Organizations, 17(2), 137-155.

Gruber and Mohr (1982). Strategic

management for multi-program

nonprofit organizations. California

Management Review, vol. xxiv,

no.3, Spring, pp.15-22.

CASE: CARE Kenya: Making

Social Enterprise Sustainable

Case Qs:

1) George believes that REAP’s

Central Management Unit (CMU)

is not commercially viable over

the long term and that the

projections in case Exhibit 4 are

optimistic. Is CARE’s financial

model for the CMU feasible?

2) Identify the key stakeholders,

their strengths and weaknesses,

and determine what they stand to

gain or lose from REAP. What

insights are generated from this

analysis?

3) As George, what would you do

to make REAP sustainable?

4) How might the decision

making matrix from Gruber and

Mohr guide these analyses?

4

5) What are the drivers of the

tensions described in the Cooney

study? How applicable are these

to the CARE Kenya case?

6 9/22 Corporations

in the

Sustainability

Space-Strategy

& Marketing

Lee, Matthew, & Jay, Jason. (2015).

Strategic Responses to Hybrid

Social Ventures. California

Management Review, 57(3), 126-

148.

Carroll, G. R., & Swaminathan, A.

(2000). Why the Microbrewery

Movement? Organizational

Dynamics of Resource Partitioning

in the US Brewing Industry.

American Journal of Sociology,

106(3), 715-762.

Unruh, Gregory and Richard

Ettenson. (2010). Growing Green:

Smart paths to developing

sustainable products.

CASE: The Clorox Company

Goes Green

OPTIONAL: Campbell, J. L.

(2007). Why would corporations

behave in socially responsible

ways? An institutional theory of

corporate social responsibility.

Academy of Management Review,

32, 946-967.

OPTIONAL: Eccles, R. G.,

Perkins, K. M., & Serafeim, G.

(2012). How to become a

sustainable company. MIT Sloan

Management Review, 53(4), 43-50.

Assignment #1 Due

Case Qs:

1) Analyze the Clorox

Company’s strategies for

developing and marketing

GreenWorks products. Draw on

course readings to assess pros and

cons of their strategy.

2) Examine why Clorox chose to

develop a new brand instead of

acquiring an existing brand or

extending its household cleaner

product lines.

3) Compare Clorox’s pricing

strategy to competitors.

4) Discuss whether Clorox’s

partnership with the Sierra Club

is essential for new products or

product lines.

5) Discuss if Clorox can leverage

the success of GreenWorks in

other areas.

7 9/24 Multi-nationals

and BOP

initiatives

Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R.

(2011), Creating Shared Value,

Harvard Business Review, January-

February.

Davis, Gerald F. and Christopher J.

White. (2015). Changing Your

Company from the Inside. Harvard

Business Review Press. Chapters 2,

Case Qs:

1) What are the key features of

Shakti?

2) What was the motivation for

the Shakti initiative? Was it a

CSR initiative?

3.) How can Shakti make a

contribution to HLL’s bottom

5

3 and 8.

CASE: Unilever in India:

Hindustan Lever’s Project Shakti

line? Make an economic case?

4.) What is the Economic Value

created by Shakti? What is the

social value?

5.) What are the critical

challenges facing HLL in making

Shakti work? What should

Shakti’s managers do?

6.) If Shakti cannot become

profitable, should HLL continue

the program? Why?

8 9/29 Benefit Corps Hans Rawhouser, Michael

Cummings, Andrew Crane. (Spring

2015). Benefit Corporation

Legislation and the Emergence of a

Social Hybrid Category

California Management Review,

Vol. 57 No. 3, (pp. 13-35).

Nardia Haigh, Elena Dowin

Kennedy, John Walker. (Spring

2015). Hybrid Organizations as

Shape-Shifters: Altering Legal

Structure for Strategic Gain.

California Management Review,

Vol. 57 No. 3, (pp. 59-82).

Andre, Rae. (2015). Benefit

Corporations at a crossroads: As

lawyers weight in companies

weight their options. Business

Horizons, vol. 58 (3): 243-252.

Cooney, Koushyar, Lee & Murray

(2014). Benefit Corporation and

L3C Adoption: A Survey. Stanford

Social Innovation Review

http://ssir.org/articles/entry/benefit_

corporation_and_l3c_adoption_a_s

urvey

CASE #1- B-Lab: Building a New

Sector of the Economy

CASE #2-B-Lab: Can it Scale

Business as a Force for Good?

Case Qs:

1) What is the value added to

companies of becoming a B

Corporation? What would you

recommend B Lab do to grow the

number of B Corporations?

2) How do you assess their work

to gain legal recognition for the

benefit corporation? How

important is it to get legal

recognition in all 50 US States?

How do they approach and

interact with the growing benefit

corporation community?

3) What is your assessment of B

Lab’s tripartite mission and

strategy? Is it the secret sauce or

their albatross? If the former,

what synergies exist between the

different elements? If the later,

how do you recommend they

change their objectives?

4) How should they approach the

Etsy IPO?

6

9 10/1 Cooperative

Models

Hansmann, H. Cooperative Firms in

Theory and Practice. LTA 4/99

p.387-403.

Hansmann, H. (1990). When Does

Worker Ownership Work? ESOPs,

Law Firms, Codetermination and

Economic Democracy. The Yale

Law Journal, 99 (8), 1749-1816.

Ellerman, David. 1984. "Workers

Cooperatives: The Question of

Legal Structure." In Worker

cooperatives in America, edited by

R. Jackall and H. M. (Eds.) Levin,

p. 257-274. University of California

Press.

Abel, Hillary. (2015). Worker

Coops-Pathways to Scale.

http://community-

wealth.org/sites/clone.community-

wealth.org/files/downloads/Worker

Coops-PathwaysToScale.pdf

OPTIONAL: Ted Howard

speaking in Memphis TN at

event sponsored by the St. Louis

Federal Reserve (link on V2)

Guest speaker:

Ted Howard, Evergreen

Cooperatives

Class Prep: From the readings,

choose one management issue

raised as a challenge for

Cooperative models and prepare a

question for Ted Howard related

to the issue. Email the question

before class begins at 10:10am.

7

10 10/6 Guest lecturer Kai Hockerts. (Spring 2015).

How Hybrid Organizations Turn

Antagonistic Assets into

Complementarities. California

Management Review, Vol. 57 No.

3, (pp. 83-106).

Ingrid Mittermaier and Joey

Neugart. (2011). Operating in Two

Worlds: Tandem Structures in

Social Enterprise

The Practical Lawyer.

Case 12: The story of Greyston

Bakery (pdf-Kate)

Greyston in NYTimes:

http://www.nytimes.com/top/refe

rence/timestopics/subjects/f/food

/index.html?query=GREYSTON

%20BAKERY&field=org&matc

h=exact

60 Minutes:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/

watch/?id=7380292n

Guest speaker:

Mike Brady, President

Greyston Bakery, Inc.

Class Prep: From the readings,

choose one management issue

raised as a challenge for

nonprofits like Greyston. Topics

for a query might include:

a) From Mittermaier and

Neugart: challenges and

opportunities for

nonprofits with a for

profit entity

b) From Hockerts:

challenges and

opportunities on the issue

of ‘open hiring’.

Be specific and per usual,

email the question before

class begins at 10:10am.

8

11 10/8 Choosing the

Right

Organizational

Form

Dees and Anderson, (2002).

Blurring Sector Boundaries:

Serving Social Purposes Through

For-Profit Structures, CASE

Working Paper Series No. 2.

Cooney, K. (2012). Mission

control: examining the

institutionalization of new legal

forms of social enterprise in

different strategic action

fields. Social Enterprises: An

Organizational Perspective, New

York: Palgrave-Macmillan, 198-

221.

Bromberger, Allen R. Social

Enterprise: A Lawyer’s Perspective

Wexler, Robert A. and David

A.Levitt. (2012). Using New

Hybrid Legal Forms: Three Case

Studies, Four Important Questions,

and a Bunch of Analysis

The Exempt Organization Tax

Review.

Stout, Lynn. (2012). The

Shareholder Value Myth. Chapters

1, 2 and 3.

In-Class Exercise on

Organizational Design /

Midterm Review

12 10/13 Social Business Yunus, M. (2010) Building Social

Business, chapters 1, 2 & 5. Public

Affairs, LLC.

CASE: Danone Grameen (ch.2 in

Yunus book)

Davis, G. F. (2014). Corporate

power in the 21st century.

(Instructor copy)

Davis, G. F., & Chu, J. S. (2015).

Stability and Change in Corporate

Governance. Emerging Trends in

the Social and Behavioral Sciences:

An Interdisciplinary, Searchable,

and Linkable Resource.

Eccles, Robert G, Ioannou, Ioannis,

& Serafeim, George. (2014). The

impact of corporate sustainability

Guest speaker: Corinne Bazina,

Danone, former Managing

Director of Grameen Danone

Class Prep: From the readings,

choose one management issue

raised as a challenge or

opportunity Social Business

models and prepare a question for

related to the issue. Email the

question to the TA and CC: me

before class begins at 10:10am.

9

on organizational processes and

performance. Management Science,

60(11), 2835-2857.

13 10/15 Midterm Covers all content on

Organizational Legal Forms

10/20-

10/22

No Class-SOM Global Studies Week

14 10/27 Sector

Selection

Frumkin,P. and Sosa,S. (2012)

Spectrum Filters: Toward a

Normative Theory of Sector

Selection, Paper presented at ISTR

Conference Siena, Italy 2012.

CASE: Acumen Fund and

Embrace: From the Leading

Edge of Social Venture Investing

Assignment #2 due

Case Questions:

1) Drawing on course readings,

discuss 3-5 specific advantages to

the nonprofit form and discuss 3-

5 specific advantages to the for-

profit form for social enterprise

organizations.

2) Introduce and apply the Soza

& Frumkin model for sector

selection to answer the question:

Should Embrace convert to a for-

profit or hybrid organizational

structure? Why or why not?

3) Describe with some detail the

specific organizational structure

design that you recommend.

Note: For the purposes of

Assignment 2, “hybrid” in the

Frumkin and Soza model

indicates a nonprofit-for profit

joint structure such as a NP

with a FP subsidiary or a

brother-sister NP-FP tandem

model.

The FP category includes L3C

and Benefit Corps in addition

to traditional FP forms.

15 10/29 Managing the

double and

triple bottom

line

Trelstad, B. (2008). Simple

measures for social

enterprise. innovations, 3(3), 105-

118.

Case questions:

1)What are the key strategic

issues that the KaBOOM! Board

of Directors needs to monitor to

ensure that the organization

prospers?

10

Diane Holt, David Littlewood.

(2015). Identifying, Mapping, and

Monitoring the Impact of Hybrid

Firms. California Management

Review, Vol. 57 No. 3, Spring 2015;

(pp. 107-125).

Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K.

(2014). What Impact?.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,

BERKELEY, 56(3).

CASE-Playgrounds and

Performance (A & B)

(HBS)

2) As a Board member, what

measures would you want to see?

How would you want them to be

presented? How often would you

want them to be collected and

reported?

3)Choose, and prepare to defend,

a reasonably well-defined strategy

–meaning a rough distribution of

effort and attention across Lead,

Seed and Rally. Should Lead

continue to grow? How much

effort would you devote to

rapidly expanding Seed? To what

extent would you try to build

KaBOOM!’s future through

Rally?

4)Are the metrics and information

needs different for Home Depot

and KaBOOM!? How much

information and evidence on

social impact should Home Depot

demand on this and their other

CSR expenditures?

16 11/3 Measuring

Impact: SROI

Lingane, A., & Olsen, S. (2004).

Guidelines for social return on

investment.California Management

Review, 46(3), 116-135.

Reeder, Neil, Colantonio, Andrea,

Loder, John, & Jones, Gemma

Rocyn. (2015). Measuring impact in

impact investing: an analysis of the

predominant strength that is also its

greatest weakness. Journal of

Sustainable Finance & Investment,

1-19.

Ryan, P. W. and Lyne, I. 2008.

Social Enterprise and the

Measurement of Social Value:

Methodological Issues with the

Calculation and Application of the

Social Return on Investment.

Education, Knowledge and

Economy, 2(3): 223–37.

CASE: Robin Hood Foundation

Case Qs:

1) The head of Sunshine Homes

was honored as a Robin Hood

hero for the wonderful work she

has done. Now the foundation

says she has just received her last

grant. This BC methodology must

be incredibly smart or just plain

dumb. Which is it?

2) How valuable is the

methodology for comparing

apples to oranges, that is,

investments in different

portfolios?

3) How should the Robin Hood

Foundation assess its own

performance?

4) What has RHF done to support

and build its approach to

performance measurement and

what more could it do?

11

5) If you were going to the RHF

tomorrow in Weinstein’s place,

how many of you would keep its

measurement approach?

17 11/5 SROI examples

CASE: Ace Social Venture Fund:

Estimating Social Value Creation

SROI Methodology resources:

REDF:

1. REDF (2001) SROI

Methodology. Retrieved from

www.redf.org

2. REDF (2009) SROI Act II:

http://community-

wealth.org/_pdfs/news/recent-

articles/01-10/paper-gair09.pdf

Robin Hood

1. Weinstein, M.M. (2009). How

Robin Hood Estimates the Impact of

Grants, New York: Robin Hood

Foundation.

2. Robin Hood Metrics Formulas

Sept. 2014

https://www.robinhood.org/sites/def

ault/files/user-uploaded-

images/Robin%20Hood%20Metrics

%20Equations_BETA_Sept-

2014.pdf

NEF:

NEF Guide to SROI

Examples of SROI studies:

Cooney, Kate and Cerullo-Lynch,

Kristen. (2012) Jewish Vocational

Services, Greater Boston (JVS)

SROI

Position papers on SROI:

1. Moody, M., Littlepage, L. and

Paydar, N. (2015), Measuring

Social Return on Investment.

Nonprofit Management and

Leadership.doi: 10.1002/nml.21145

Case Qs:

1) Consider the three measures

suggested by Matt in Appendix A

to measure the social impact of

the VF’s philanthropy. Analyze

each methodology’s benefits and

limitations. Specify the trade-offs

between the three approaches.

What is the most demanding

approach, requiring a

comprehensive collection and

measurement of costs and

outcomes? Which is the least?

Why is the focus only on the

costs of the approaches and not

the benefits?

2) The three proposals described

in Appendix B are indicative of

the mission, business purpose and

philosophy of the more than 25

proposals for funding received by

the ACE VF.

a-For each program, list with as

much detail as possible, the data

that the NPOs would have to

collect, both internally and

externally, under each of the three

approaches.

b-Given the nature of the

proposals and the possible data

constraints, which approach or

metric is most effective in

evaluating the various proposals

for funding? Why?

c-Suggest any other approach or

metric that ACE VF could use to

evaluate the various proposals.

Would it be more effective than

the three measures suggested by

Matt? Why?

12

2-Cooney, Kate, & Lynch-Cerullo,

Kristen. (2014). Measuring the

Social Returns of Nonprofits and

Social Enterprises: The Promise and

Perils of the SROI. Nonprofit Policy

Forum, 5(2), 367-393.

3-Millar, Ross, & Hall, Kelly.

(2012). Social Return on

Investment (SROI) and

Performance Measurement. Public

Management Review, 15(6), 923-

941.

4-Mulgan, G. (2010). Measuring

social value. Stanford Soc Innov

Rev, 8(3), 38-43.

5-SROI position paper, New

Philanthropy Capital

18 11/10 Financing and

Capital

Structure

Chertok, M., Hamaoui, J. and

Jamison, E. (2008), The Funding

Gap. Stanford Social Innovation

Review. Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.44‐51

Spiess-Knafl, W., & Jansen, S. A.

(2014). Social Enterprises and the

Financing of Different Scaling

Strategies. In Emerging Research

Directions in Social

Entrepreneurship (pp. 67-83).

Springer Netherlands.

Brest, P., & Born, K. (2013). When

Can Impact Investing Create Real

Impact?. Stanford Social Innovation

Review, 11, 22-27.

CASE: Good Capital and Better

World Books

OPTIONAL: Cheng, Beiting,

Ioannou, Ioannis, & Serafeim,

George. (2014). Corporate social

responsibility and access to finance.

Strategic Management Journal,

35(1), 1-23.

Case Qs:

1) Is BWB a good investment for

GoodCap?

2) How can Selke and GoodCap

structure the deal so that BWB’s

social and environmental mission

is preserved upon exit?

3) What should Selke and

GoodCap do about BWB’s

inconsistent philanthropic giving

scheme?

4) What should David Murphy,

president and CEO, and the BWB

management team consider before

accepting an equity investment

from GoodCap?

13

OPTIONAL: Ioannou, Ioannis, &

Serafeim, George. (2014). The

impact of corporate social

responsibility on investment

recommendations: Analysts'

perceptions and shifting

institutional logics. Strategic

Management Journal.

19 11/12 Democratizing

Finance

Fred Block, “Democratizing

Finance,” forthcoming in Politics &

Society Marguerite Mendell and

Rocío Nogales, “Solidarity Finance:

An Evolving Landscape,”

Universitas Forum, Vol. 3, No. 2,

June 2012

Matt Flannery “Kiva and the Birth

of Person-to-Person Microfinance,”

Innovations/ winter & spring 2007

pp. 31-56

Kevin Lawton and Dan Marom,

The Crowd-funding revolution

(McGraw Hill, 2013). chapter 5,

“the rise of crowdfunding” and

chapter 9, “Infrastructure and

ecosystems” pp. 47-66; 121-144

Stemler, Abbey R. (2013) The

JOBS Act and Crowdfunding:

Harnessing the Power and Money

of the Masses. Business Horizons.

56(3): p.271.

Case: Kiva Vs. MYC4: Business

Model Innovation in Social

Lending (HBS)

Case Qs:

1) What problem are Kiva and

MC4 attempting to solve? What

is the value proposition (problem,

target market, solution)?

2) Compare Kiva and MYC4 in

terms of the system of

activities—the key flows of

activities in the businesses.

3) How similar/different are the

Kiva and MYC4 business

models?

4) Which business model do you

think is more scalable, why?

5) In addition to scalability, what

are the other key characteristics or

dimensions of a good business

model in SE space?

6) Compare and contrast the two

models based on these additional

factors.

20 11/17 New Financial

Vehicles:

Social Impact

Bonds

Liebman, J. (2011). Social Impact

Bonds. Report for Center for

American Progress:

http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-

content/uploads/issues/2011/02/pdf/

social_impact_bonds.pdf

CASE: Social Finance, Inc.

Case Qs:

1) How do the proposed Social

Impact Bonds work?

2) How should Social Finance

structure the financial instrument?

As a bond? As equity? As some

hybrid?

14

3) Consider SF’s proposed

structure form the standpoint of

the government, the social sector

and private capital? What are the

strengths? What are the

weaknesses?

4) What type of project should SF

target? Homelessness, education,

or youth recidivism? Should it do

one, two or all three?

21 11/19 Social Impact

Bonds in

Action

Guest speaker: John Grossman,

Third Sector Capital Partners,

Inc.

11/20

Assignment #3 (SROI) due, upload by midnight Friday

11/23-

11/27

No Class-SOM November Break

22 12/1 Models for

Growth: Social

Franchise

Gillis, W., & Castrogiovanni, G. J.

(2012). The franchising business

model: an entrepreneurial growth

alternative. International

Entrepreneurship and Management

Journal, 8(1), 75-98.

Weber, Christiana, Arne Kroger,

Kathrin Lambrich. (2012). Scaling

social enterprises—A theoretically

grounded framework. Frontiers of

Entrepreneurship Research, 32(19),

Article 3.

Tracey, Paul & Jarvis, Owen.

Toward a Theory of social venture

franchising. Entrepreneurship

theory and practice. 31, 5, 667-685.

Kistruck, G. M., Webb, J. W.,

Sutter, C. J., & Ireland, R. D.

(2011). Microfranchising in Base‐of‐the‐Pyramid Markets:

Institutional Challenges and

Adaptations to the Franchise

Model. Entrepreneurship Theory

and Practice, 35(3), 503-531.

Case Qs:

1) From the Gillis and

Castrogiovanni reading, what are

the advantages and disadvantages

of franchising as a growth

strategy?

2) From the Kistruck et al. article,

how is franchising different at the

BOP?

3) Role play: Shah (CEO) and

Sateesh (franchisee in Vasai)—

Shah brings up the issues

uncovered during the surprise

visit and Sateesh defends the

operation.

4) What should Shah do with the

Vasai franchise?

5) Should social buy-in to the

mission be a requirement for all

the franchisees?

15

CASE-Sarvajal: Water for All

OPTIONAL: Epstein, M. J., &

Bing, E. G. (2011). Delivering

health care to the global poor:

Solving the accessibility problem.

innovations, 6(2), 117-141.

OPTIONAL: Jishnu Das and

Jeffrey Hammer

Location, Location, Location:

Residence, Wealth, And The

Quality Of Medical Care In

Delhi, India Health Affairs, 26, no.3

(2007):w338-w351

OPTIONAL: Rao, K. D.,

Sundararaman, T., Bhatnagar, A.,

Gupta, G., Kokho, P., & Jain, K.

(2013). Which doctor for primary

health care? Quality of care and

non-physician clinicians in India.

Social science & medicine, 84, 30-

34.

6) What are the current operating

problems (aside from the general

franchising concepts already

discussed) that may affect future

expansion?

7) Considering these insights, is

Sarvajal poised for growth?

Assess the limitations,

opportunities, vulnerabilities,

competition and execution. If yes,

how should Sarvajal scale?

23 12/3 Scaling Impact Dees, J. G., Anderson, B. B., &

Wei-Skillern, J. (2004). Scaling

Social Impact:

Strategies for Spreading Social

Innovations. Stanford Social

Innovation Review 1(4): 24-32.

Desa, G., & Koch, J. L. (2014).

Scaling Social Impact: Building

Sustainable Social Ventures at the

Base-of-the-Pyramid. Journal of

Social Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 146-

174.

Jaffee, D. (2012). Weak coffee:

Certification and co-optation in the

fair trade movement. Social

Problems, 59(1), 94-116.

CASE: Fair Trade USA:

Innovating for Impact

OPTIONAL: Aubry, R. (2004)

Taking your venture to scale,

pp.281-301 in Oster, S.M.,

Massarsky, C.W., and Beinhacker,

Case Qs:

1) The case opens with the

collapse of the price of coffee due

to oversupply in the 1990s. How

is this situation an opportunity for

Fair Trade USA?

2) What are the benefits of

moving to Fair Trade suppliers

for retailers? What are the

constraints?

3) What are the key factors that

will drive growth for Fair Trade

products? What is FT USA’s plan

for growth in market share?

4) What are the arguments for and

against expanding the FT model

to include larger coffee estates?

5) Do you think Paul Rice made

the right decision? Why or why

not?

16

S.L. (Eds) Generating and

Sustaining Nonprofit Earned

Income, San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

24 12/8 Exits and the

Public Market,

part 1

In the next two sessions, we will

examine successful for-profit social

entrepreneurs and their exit choices

by comparing the acquisitions of

Ben & Jerry’s and StonyfieldFarms:

Exit 1: Ben & Jerry’s

CASE: Preserving Mission and

Brand Within Unilever

Ben's Big Flop, Edward O. Welles,

Inc., September 01, 1998.

Unilever Funds Anticapitalists:

Groups Gain Millions through Ben

& Jerry Takeover, Financial Times

(London), October 6, 2001.

Teather, David. (2010, April 3).

Sold up but not sold out, Ben and

Jerry’s are still the poster boys for

fair trade. The Observer, Sunday

edition.

Page, Anthony and Robert Katz

(2012). The Truth about Ben and

Jerry’s. Stanford Social Innovation

Review.

Assignment #4 due:

Class will be divided into groups.

Each group will prepare an oral

presentation of their case analysis

(of one of the two cases listed for

Session 25).

Team presentations should

include: 1) a detailed description

of the specific deals negotiated by

the focal SE with the larger

acquiring company; 2) an

assessment of the SE’s alternative

options at the time; and 3) an

argument either pro or con that

this deal represented the best

option for preserving social

mission of the SE.

The teams and the pro or con

position will both be assigned by

the instructor.

25 12/10 Exits and the

Public Market,

part 2

Exit 2: Stonyfield Farms

CASE: Gary Hirshberg and

Stonyfield Farm

Online case: Strategic Mission-

Driven Sustainable Business:

Stonyfield Yogurt

Goodman, David (2003). Does the

selling of Stonyfield Farm yogurt

signal the end of socially

responsible business—or a new

beginning? Mother Jones,

January/February.

Assignment #4 due:

Class will be divided into groups.

Each group will prepare an oral

presentation of their case analysis

(of one of the two cases listed for

Session 25).

Guidelines for presentations will

be posted on V2.

The teams and the pro or con

position will both be assigned by

the instructor.

17

Rose, Julie (2002). Selling His Soul

to Dannon? Forbes Small Business,

December 2001/January 2002

MacDonald, Christine. (2011). The

Big Green Buyout. The

Environmental Magazine Organics, Stonyfield and

O’Naturals in 2012,

SustainableBusiness.com, June/July

2002.

Additional:

Murray, J. H. (2013). Defending

Patagonia: Mergers and

Acquisitions with Benefit

Corporations. Hastings Bus. LJ, 9,

485-539.

26 12/15 Wrap Up

*Bruck, Connie. (2006). Millions

for Millions: This year’s Nobel

Peace Prize winner and some high-

tech entrepreneurs are competing to

provide credit to the world’s poor,

The New Yorker, 30 October 2006.

Simon-Moya, V., Revuelto-

Taboada, L., and Ribeiro-Soriano,

D. (2012). Are success and survival

factors the same for social and

business ventures? Service Busines,

6:p.219-242.

Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., &

Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing

Social-Business Tensions. Business

Ethics Quarterly, 23(3), 407-442.

Kreutzer, K., & Mauksch, S.

(2014). The One and the Many

Sides of Social Business: A Critical

Reflection. In Social Business (pp.

225-237). Springer Berlin

Heidelberg.

Discussion Qs:

1) Review the Bruck article. What

are the implications for social

enterprises operating in a mixed

industry of strong FP oriented

SEs and hybrid or pure NPs?

Consider both the social and the

economic value proposition in

your response.

2) What is the most valuable take

away for you from the course

readings/discussions/guest

speakers/assignments?

3) What is the burning question

you still find yourself asking

about managing social enterprise

organizations?

Time allotted for students

working on their own

entrepreneurial social

enterprise projects to present as

aspect of their project to the

class for feedback and input.

18

Course Grading, Assignments and Policies:

(15%) Class participation This is a case-based course and preparation for class case discussions and

small group work is a key requirement of the course. Case and reading questions are included on the

syllabus for each week. Students should be prepared for cold -calling on these questions. Each week you

will receive a score based on your contributions to class discussion according to the evaluation rubric for

class participation below. Attendance: Attendance is very important for a discussion based class and

missing class will affect your grade. However, if you have to miss class for an excused absence, to

remain in good standing, submit a write up of the case questions for that week to the instructor and

TA by email.

Points Criteria

0

1

very infrequent involvement in discussion.

2

show evidence of trying to interpret or analyze them.

straightforward information (e.g., straight from the case or reading), without

elaboration or very infrequently (perhaps once a class).

called on.

radic involvement.

3

implications of them.

n an ongoing way: responds to other students' points,

thinks through own points, questions others in a constructive way, offers and supports

suggestions that may be counter to the majority opinion.

4

Demonstrates excellent preparation: has analyzed case exceptionally well, relating it to

readings and other material (e.g., readings, course material, discussions, experiences, etc.).

ts together pieces of

the discussion to develop new approaches that take the class further.

responds very thoughtfully to other students' comments, contributes to the cooperative

argument-building, suggests alternative ways of approaching material and helps class

analyze which approaches are appropriate, etc.

Additionally, there is a Midterm and a set of Assignments (see next page).

19

Assignment #1: Eco Mapping, Industry and Stakeholder Analysis-due Session 6

Working individually or in a group of up to three other people*, prepare an industry analysis, stakeholder

analysis, and eco-map for an organization that you are familiar with through your work, interning,

volunteering or consulting activities. Use the frameworks discussed in class. Details posted on the V2

website.

20% of grade

Deliverable: 5-7 page paper.

Midterm: Legal Structure and Organizational Design, Session 13

10% of grade

Assignment #2: Organizational Structure/ Sector Analysis -due Session 14

Write a 3 to 5 page case analysis for the case listed as the option for Assignment 2 or assess the

possibilities for organizational structure and sector choice for a SE organization that you are familiar with

through your work, interning, volunteering or consulting activities. Case questions are posted on the class

V2 site.

15% of grade

Deliverable: 3 to 5 page paper.

Assignment #3-SROI -due Friday after Session 21 at midnight

Work alone or with up to three other people* in the class to complete an SROI calculation for the case

given or for another organization you are familiar with through your work, interning, volunteering or

consulting activities. Be precise. A guide for the analysis will be posted on the V2 site.

30% of grade

Deliverable: 5-7 page paper.

Assignment #4-SOCIAL ENTERPRISE EXITS-due Sessions 24 and 25: Class will be divided into

groups. Each group will give a presentation arguing for or against the strategies deployed for protecting

social mission in mature social enterprise organizations described in one of the two cases. Cases will be

assigned by the professor. The assignment is to prepare and deliver an oral presentation to the class.

There will be two pro teams and two con teams for each case/session date. The pro teams will be

responsible for laying out the details of the exit deal. The con teams can add to what has already been

said about these details, if something was missed or underemphasized. The pro teams will each have 12

minutes to present their arguments followed by two 12 minute presentations by the con teams. In the

rebuttal round, the representatives across the pro teams will have 7 minutes total to make a rebuttal and

the same for the con teams. Then we will open it up for class discussion.

10% of grade

Deliverable: In class power point presentation.

*Note: For the assignments where group work is an option, teams that incorporate the diversity of the

degree programs in the class (e.g. MBA, MAM, FES, SPH, etc.) receive +1 point on the assignment grade

for each new degree program in the group mix. For example, if a team has 2 MBAs and 1 FES, the team

will get +1 on the assignment grade. If the team has 1 MBA, 1 FES and 1 SPH, the team will get +2 on

the assignment grade. This incentive is there to encourage cross program learning opportunities and to

take into consideration that this kind of cross disciplinary learning on a team assignment can be hard,

scheduling can be difficult, and it takes effort to get out of your comfort zone.

20

Policies:

Assignment submissions and due dates-Identify yourself on your papers by your student ID only.

Please upload all assignments to V2. No late assignments will be accepted unless student submits a

written accommodation request from the appropriate Yale administrator.

Grading-Assignments will be graded on an A, B, C, D, F basis and then converted to the grading rubric

associated with your school. For this course, we will be following the guidelines for grading an elective

with a mixed population of students from MAM, second year MBA, HCM and non-SOM students.

According to this policy, an aggregate grading pool will be constructed and students will be ranked

according to weighted scores across all assignments. For Yale SOM students, High Honors is awarded to

those falling within the top 10 percent of the class, Honors to the next 25%, Proficiency to next 55 percent

and Pass awarded to those falling within the lowest 5% of the ranking. F is an absolute standard. Non-

SOM student final grades will be translated from final numeric grade and rank to the grading guidelines

from the home school.

Laptop, etc. Policy-In keeping with general Yale SOM practice, there is a no laptop policy during case

discussion to emphasize the importance of your attention and participation in the class discussion. If you

are found to be utilizing phone, tablets, laptops or other devices for non-class related uses and this is

disruptive to other students, you will be asked to power down.

Attendance- Attendance is very important for a discussion based class and missing class will affect your

grade. However, if you have to miss class, to remain in good standing, submit a write up of the case

questions for that week to the instructor by email and receive partial points for the class session.

Office hours-Office hours will be held weekly on Thursdays from 12:15pm until 1:30pm. Please make

an appointment. To sign up for a timeslot for office hours, email my outlook calendar with a request. If

you do not make an appointment, I may schedule other meetings during that time. Email is also a good

way to reach me (kate.cooney@yale.edu). My office is located on 5th floor, north of Evans Hall, #5218.

Email-For questions on assignments, please email the TA (Greg Pfeiffer) and cc: me. Greg will

handle routine questions and more complicated questions I will field the first time through. After that,

Greg will respond if it is a repeat question. For questions about access to course reserve materials,

please email Rhona Ceppos and cc: me.

MGMT 621 Teaching Assistant

Greg Pfeiffer

gregory.pfeiffer@yale.edu

(860) 992-3852

Faculty Support for Course Website:

Rhona Ceppos

Rhona.ceppos@yale.edu

203-436-8861