Success Factors of Social Entrepreneurship. The Rise of Generation Z and the Necessity of Social Intrapreneurship for Companies

Table of contents

1. Introduction
1.1 Problem Definition
1.2 Objective and Research Question
1.3 Structure and Methodology of Study

2. SocialEntrepreneurship
2.1. Definition ofSocial Entrepreneurship
2.2. Characteristics, Forms, and Examples ofGood Practice
2.2.1 Entrepreneurial Element
2.2.2 Founding ofan Organization
2.2.3 Innovation
2.2.4 Social Value Proposition
2.3 Examples of Good Practice
2.3.1 DKMS
2.3.2 Viva con Agua
2.3.3 ReCup
2.4 Definition and Characteristics ofSocial Entrepreneurs
2.5 Special Features ofSocial Entrepreneurship in Germany
2.6 Distinction Between Traditional and Social Entrepreneurship

3. Generation Z
3.1 Definition and Classification ofGeneration Z
3.2 Properties and Requirements
3.3 Influence of Generation Z on Entrepreneurship

4. Success Factor Analysis
4.1 Success Factor Analysis for Social Entrepreneurship
4.1.1 Success Factors ofSocial Entrepreneurship
4.1.2 Success Factors of Social Entrepreneurs
4.2 Success Factor Analysis for Generation Z

5. Consequences for German Labor Market
5.1 ChallengesforGenerationZ
5.2 Challenges for Employers and Companies

6. Social Intrapreneurship as a Solution for Generation Z and Employers in Germany
6.1. Intrapreneurship
6.1.1. Definition of Intrapreneurship
6.1.2. Characteristics and Forms of Intrapreneurship and Intrapreneurs
6.1.3. Requirements of Intrapreneurship for Employers
6.2 Social Intrapreneurship
6.2.1 Definition and Derivation ofSocial Intrapreneurship
6.2.2 Success Factors of Social Intrapreneurship
6.3 Derivation and Development of Concept for Success Factors
6.3.1 Presentation and Discussion of Methodology
6.3.2 Integration of Success Factor Analysis
6.3.3 Introduction ofSocial Intrapreneurship Model
6.3.4 Critical Consideration and Generalizability of Results

7. Conclusion and Vision

Abstract

The rise of Generation Z in German society will also impact many companies' management levels, as young entrepreneurs will increasingly determine the German economy. Accord­ingly, managers and companies' demands will change, as Generation Z stands for change and social innovation and wants to realize this in the workplace and combine business with social added value.

In this work, basic knowledge in Social Entrepreneurship and Generation Z will first be con­veyed to name the respective success factors. In the further course, it will be made clear that German society's framework conditions and the economy have a strong influence on the fact that social enterprises' founding faces obstacles. Accordingly, an approach that enables the realization of Generation Z's professional and social goals within an employee model is essential. Due to this, further theoretical knowledge about Intrapreneurship and Social Intrapreneurship will be given in the further course of the thesis.

Despite extensive research, no existing Social Intrapreneurship model can be found, which is why an existing model for innovation activities is used.

A new concept for implementing Social Intrapreneurship in existing companies is developed and explained based on the knowledge gained and success factors, and areas that have not been sufficiently considered in the literature are implemented and presented.

Social Intrapreneurship will meet the requirements and expectations of employees and Generation Z in the future to keep the German economy innovative and emphasize the social aspect.

List of figures

Figure 1: Total number of donors at the international entities

Figure 2: Development of donor numbers over the years

Figure 3: The innovation model: Fields ofaction

Figure 4: Graphical representation ofthe success factors

Figure 5: The Social Intrapreneurship Model

List of abbreviations

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

1. Introduction

The concept of sustainability and the sustainable treatment of our envi­ronment and climate is on everyone's lips. The mindful use of our natural resources is the defining theme of society in 2021 and is finding enormous resonance in business, the media and politics.¹ Climate protests and strikes by young students are attracting a lot of attention, regularly grace the headlines of relevant press papers, and their iron will to change some­thing seems admirable and outstanding.²

It is grotesque that no one thinks about dealing with this unique generation sustainably and admiring potentials but does not invest in human resource planning. The "Fridays for Future Generation" is not only our future, but they will change it with as much vigor as they intend to do with climate policy. Shouldn't the prevailing theme in 2021 be expanded to include sus­tainable human resource management? Might our concerns not soon be diminished if decision-makers in our country belong to the admirable gen­eration?

Despite the high relevance and awareness that this generation's require­ments differ significantly from previous generations, the necessary adjust­ments, opportunities, and risks of this change do not receive sufficient at­tention in research, which is why this thesis deals with this aspect.

1.1 Problem Definition

The term "entrepreneur" has been known for many generations and, over the years, has been associated with a wide variety of clichés, typical core characteristics, and behaviors.³

Generation Z (GenZ), defined in more detail in chapter 3, differs signifi­cantly from previous generations in its requirements, norms, and values according to social studies. The definition of the entrepreneur focuses pri­marily on economic and profit-oriented action and rarely on social con­cerns. Simultaneously, while movements such as "Fridays for Future" or "Black Lives Matter" have made it clear in recent years how strongly the subsequent employees and employers of the generation born after 1995 stand for transparency, equality, and social commitment.⁴

Thus, the term Social Entrepreneur, and thus a socially engaged and in­terested entrepreneur, is becoming increasingly essential and perma­nently changes an entrepreneur's perception and the clichés it describes. Nevertheless, are the general characteristics still up-to-date, and do these clichés reflect future generations of entrepreneurs' requirements and ex­pectations? Will people from the GenZ who have an interest in entrepre­neurship find themselves self-employed at all in the future, or will new employee models be needed to enable the requirements and wishes of those people to be met in an employment relationship?

Despite the high relevance and awareness that this generation's require­ments differ significantly from previous generations, the necessary adjust­ments, opportunities, and risks of this change do not receive sufficient at­tention in research, which is why a deeper analysis is needed.

1.2 Objective and Research Question

This thesis aims to give a prognosis of how classic entrepreneurship will increasingly develop in the direction of Social Entrepreneurship by explic­itly analyzing the terms Social Entrepreneurship and GenZ.

In this work, special attention is paid to GenZ and its characteristics. This generation is characterized in particular by the fact that it approaches, im­plements, and prioritizes things differently than previous generations and that this generation will be the future entrepreneurs who will decisively influence technology, the economy, and services. (See 3.)

In the later course of the work, however, it becomes clear that due to the national framework conditions of the German economy and society, there are clear obstacles to the founding of social enterprises, which is why the work from this point onwards deals with uniting the acquired knowledge and the focus on social motivation within an employee model.

Accordingly, the concept of Intrapreneurship and Social Intrapreneurship is defined and explained in more detail in the further course, leading to a Social Intrapreneurship model with recommendation for action implemen­tation ofSocial Intrapreneurship afterthis process.

Based on the described objective, the following research question arises: What factors influence the development of entrepreneurship in Germany?

In addition to the research question, the following sub-questions arise:

- To what extent do the success factors of Social Entrepreneurship coincide with those of Generation Z as future entrepreneurs?
- Which core characteristics of existing entrepreneurship fit Gener­ation Z's requirements and which need to be redefined?
- Will classic entrepreneurship still prevail in the future, or does the future lie in Social Intrapreneurship?

Based on the sub-questions and existing research, the following hypoth­esis emerges:

Due to the strong influence of Generation Z's needs and the rise of Social Entrepreneurship, definable success factors represent a trend towards in­creased development in the direction of Social Intrapreneurship.

1.3 Structure and Methodology of Study

In order to be able to answer the research question defined in chapter 1.2. with its sub-questions, this thesis's methodology and procedure is now explained. The theoretical part aims to analyze the success factors of So­cial Entrepreneurship and GenZ as future entrepreneurs and, in particular, to examine the connection between the two concerning the future devel­opment of entrepreneurship. This is preceded by a definition of the terms, functions, and the respective target group in order to be able to combine them in terms of content in a success factor analysis. In the further course, the insights gained are placed in the national context, and the conse­quences for the German labor market are defined.

This then leads to an extension of the theoretical part to include the defi­nition of intrapreneurship, with its characteristics, forms, and requirements for employers and a more detailed definition and explanation of the term Social Intrapreneurship.

The practical application of this work starts in chapter 6.3, where the knowledge gained is put into a practical context, and a model for the im­plementation ofSocial Intrapreneurship is presented and explained.

The knowledge gained is critically examined and checked for general va­lidity, and the author formulates a conclusion and a vision for the devel­opment of entrepreneurship in Germany at the end of the work.

Due to given framework, individual aspects are examined in particular with regard to the present research. Therefore, individual aspects cannot be examined in their entirety, which is why there is no claim to completeness. Likewise, a qualitative or quantitative survey and interviewing of the target group, GenZ, would have been considered useful, but could not be carried out due to framework conditions.

2. Social Entrepreneurship

“Ifyou are not making a difference in other people's lives, you should not be in business - it is that simple.” - Richard Branson.⁵

This quote from Richard Branson, an English business magnate, investor, and founder of the Virgin Group⁶, describes the core vision and key as­pects of Social Entrepreneurship. In his opinion and following the vision of Social Entrepreneurship, an entrepreneur's main driving force should be that, right next to the focus of economic efficiency, there is the social societal benefit that makes a difference or improves a social problem and improves or even solves it.⁷

Therefore the following chapter deals with the concept of Social Entrepre­neurship, its definition, and the most significant and essential features and forms. In addition to the explanation, exemplary companies are listed which have already successfully mastered the "conflict between the com­mon good and self-interest, social mission and profitability"⁸ in the national economic market.

This chapter aims to provide a basic understanding of the most important concepts related to Social Entrepreneurship and provide the basis for an­swering the first two sub-questions.

2.1. Definition of Social Entrepreneurship

In the following chapter, this thesis will explain the concept and meaning of Social Entrepreneurship in more detail. For this purpose, different defi­nitions from scientific publications and book publications will be used to determine a correct definition for this thesis at the end of this chapter.

It should be noted here that special attention is paid to the meaning and effectiveness of Social Entrepreneurship in the German national context, and those possible deviations in other cultural circles are deliberately ex­cluded and not addressed.

Social Entrepreneurship and the ever-increasing number of Social Entre­preneurs are becoming increasingly popular in our society, especially in the national economy. This is especially true because the skimming of the values and social benefits generated by such companies' entrepreneurial activities is increasingly facilitated by political measures⁹ and can thus make use of a favorable economic situation.¹⁰

While in recent years, especially in traditional companies, the focus has been firmly on profitability and profit maximization, the aspect of linking economic demands with the pursuit of social added value is now increas­ingly moving into the public consciousness.¹¹ Despite this, while leading literature and specialists on the subject can agree on essential keywords within the various definitions, there are still many different approaches to definitions that need to be ordered and agreed upon.¹²

The "Innovative Business Model"¹³ can be found, contrary to widespread belief, already in 2006 when Muhammad Yunus was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. As a "Banker to the Poor", Dr. Yunus helped poor people by founding the Gramen Bank in Bangladesh in 1983, which offered help for self-help by providing microcredits. The granting of such personal loans gave the impetus for the worldwide movement to eradicate poverty, not with blind donations of money, but with targeted microcredits, to strengthen regional economies in impoverished areas.^{14 15}

Thus, the fundamental driving force was already in 2006, entrepreneurial action, which aims to find a sustainable solution to a social problem using innovative and scalable means. This would therefore support Frischen/Lawaldt's definition from 2008.¹⁶

Sommerrock also describes these points in the first parts of his definition of Social Entrepreneurship, but in the following, he adds that the final so­lution of the problem and the elimination of the need for such social enter­prises is the real goal.¹⁷ Also, in many definitions, such as Hackl or Mair, the term novel business models or innovation is repeatedly mentioned.¹⁸

For this work, it can be stated that Social Entrepreneurship always has the claim to question, improve and optimize existing procedures and pro­cesses. The focus is always on the solution of a social or overall societal problem, which is improved, driven forward, and in the best case, com­pletely solved and abolished through economic and scalable actions.¹⁹

2.2. Characteristics, Forms, and Examples of Good Practice

To understand how Social Entrepreneurship differs from traditional entre­preneurship, it is essential to name and explain the essential characteris­tics, forms, and good enterprises in more detail. The following chapter with its scientific aspects will also be fundamental to answer the first and third sub-questions. The following passage intends to provide an insight into the different forms of Social Entrepreneurship and show, by presenting different companies, how diverse the areas in which progress is made through Social Entrepreneurship can be.

It is emphasized once again that this work deals with the national under­standing of Social Entrepreneurship, its perception, and German compa­nies who are listed as positive examples in this work.

As core characteristics in this thesis, the four characteristics defined by Roder, the entrepreneurial element, the founding of an organization, the innovation, and the social value proposition, are examined more closely. The first three characteristics serve in particular a more substantial differ­entiation from other established actors in the non-profit sector. The more detailed reference to the Social Value Proposition helps differentiate be­tween Social Entrepreneurship and classic Business Entrepreneurship.²⁰

2.2.1 Entrepreneurial Element

The central characteristic of Social Entrepreneurship is the entrepreneur­ial approach by a Social Entrepreneur or a small group next to this person. This characteristic refers to the entrepreneurial approach as well as to the person of the entrepreneur.²¹

Social Entrepreneurship is entrepreneurial, e.g., by breaking up traditional supply structures, introducing the logic of task sharing and value chains into the social sector, or focusing on the most effective and needed programs, leading to a significant reallocation of resources.²²

Firmly in focus here, however, the actions and characteristics of a suc­cessful Social Entrepreneur are still more near described and imple­mented later in this work and therefore consciously excluded.

2.2.2 Founding ofan Organization

A central characteristic of Social Entrepreneurship is the entrepreneurial approach by a Social Entrepreneur or a small group next to this person. This characteristic refers to the entrepreneurial approach as well as to the person of the entrepreneur.

Social Entrepreneurship acts entrepreneurially, e.g., by breaking up tradi­tional supply structures, introducing the logic of task sharing and value chains into the social sector, or focusing on the most effective and needed programs, leading to a significant reallocation of resources.²³ Firmly in fo­cus here, the actions and characteristics of a successful Social Entrepre­neur, which are still more near described and implemented at a later time in this work and, therefore, at this time consciously excluded.²⁴

In organization theory, a distinction is made between a functional and an institutional concept of organization.²⁵ For a definitional differentiation of Social Entrepreneurship compared to similar concepts, the organization's institutional concept is essential.²⁶ This describes the social entity itself, which permanently pursues a goal and has a formal structure, with whose assistance activities of the members are to be aligned to the pursued goal.²⁷

Accordingly, entrepreneurial action alone does not necessarily lead to an organization's foundation; conversely, entrepreneurial action is not taken every time an organization is founded.²⁸

As far as the question about the fundamental necessity of an organization is concerned, it can be assumed that the Social Entrepreneur needs an organization to implement and scaling his solution approach to achieve a new social balance.²⁹

There are various approaches to defining the forms of organizations. One basis for differentiation is structural existence, which involves a distinction between the concepts of original and derivative foundation. Original foun­dation means the complete rebuilding of an organization that did not exist before, in which one cannot build on or fall back on existing entrepreneur­ial building blocks.³⁰ On the other hand, the derivative foundation, a struc­ture-changing foundation, has its origin in existing organizations, taken over by entrepreneurial actions, and changed or adapted to the new re­quirements. Thus, compared to the original foundation, one falls back on already existing parts of the company.³¹

A further distinction of the forms of organization can be made based on the selected legal form. In theory, any legal form can be chosen for the foundation of a social business, but this depends partly on the distribution of profits to the owner and whether he operates in a for-profit or non-profit enterprise. However, this depends on the particular focus of the company and the social problem it addresses.³² The foundation process comprises different phases. The duration of the individual phases thus depends on the organization and external factors and can therefore vary considera­bly.³³

According to Roder³⁴, five phases of the development of an organization in Social Entrepreneurship can be identified:

Pilot phase:

In the beginning, there is not only the idea but also the will to start a com­pany. This will to create the company is expressed by planning first pilot projects, prototypes, and first investor meetings. In this phase, one can still speak of the pre-founding phase since the organization does not nec­essarily have to be founded yet, and a practical test has usually not yet taken place.³⁵

Foundation phase:

In this phase, the organization is formally established, and its legal form is chosen. First practical tests of the company take place, and structures are shaped by the founder and his team.³⁶

Growth phase:

After the completion of the official and legal foundation, the focus in this phase is on the growth, financing, and scaling of the planned business activities.³⁷

Maturity and establishment phase:

In this phase, the growth rate slows down since the markets are either saturated - the social problem seems to be solved - or competitors appear who want to dominate the same market.³⁸

Extension and renewal phase:

The organization's entrepreneurial action solved the previously defined social problem, and the goal of the organization was achieved. In this phase, it must be decided whether further action remains meaningful or whether one turns to another social problem and a new definition of goals. Here also strongly one discusses, starting from which point in the last phase still of an Entrepreneurial venture and starting from when of an es­tablished organization one speaks.³⁹

2.2.3 Innovation

In much of the literature, an innovative approach to solving a social or societal problem is considered a prerequisite for being a Social Entrepre­neur and being perceived by the outside world.⁴⁰ This is especially neces­sary to distinguish oneself from social initiatives. Both are necessary to solve social problems, whereby social initiatives often differ from Social Entrepreneurship mechanisms through different structures and pro­cesses.⁴¹ Innovation can be defined as the "new problem-solution" in which technical and economic problems of a social or organizational na­ture are implemented in the company or part of a market.⁴²

What is decisive here is the real realization and not the pure vision of innovation, whereby there is no need to create something wholly new and unprecedented. Much more significant improvement can also be consid­ered as a renewal. It is important here that it is a renewal or improvement in the area of interest and the organization's reference system, which means that the innovation must be more effective or efficient than all other existing alternatives to be considered a real innovation.^{43 44}

Innovations in the non-profit sector create social value because they bring about positive social change. This can provide the basis for change and improvement of development opportunities, which makes innovation all the more important, the more dynamic the environment or context in which the organization takes place.⁴⁵

In terms of the type of innovation, a distinction can be made between a narrow and comprehensive understanding of innovation. The narrow un­derstanding of innovation includes product and process innovation, which is creating a new product or service or improved product quality or the application of new technologies and processes to replace, modify or com­plement existing processes. With a more comprehensive understanding of innovation, organizational innovations are also included, so structural innovations that bring about change are also included. These do not have to be based on a new invention but only result from innovative improve­ments ofthe process organization.⁴⁶

When talking about innovations, the demand for the degree of innovation often falls in this context.⁴⁷ By looking at the degree of innovation, innova­tions can be classified as evolutionary and revolutionary on a continuum with the characteristics:

Evolutionary (or incremental) innovations:

- Low degree of innovation.
- Continuous improvement or follow-up innovation of existing prod­ucts, processes, or structures.⁴⁸

Revolutionary innovations (pioneering, fundamental, or breakthrough in­novation):

- Unstructured and discontinuous.
- Fundamental consequences concerning the affected products, processes, or structures.⁴⁹

2.2.4 Social Value Proposition

Another central feature in this context is the Social Value Proposition. This represents the organization's social dimension and is often listed in the literature as a social mission, value creation, or problem solver. In order to define social value more precisely, it helps to take a closer look at the concept of social value creation.⁵⁰

Phills, Deiglmeier, and Miller describe it as follows:

“The creation of benefits or reduction of costs for society - through efforts to address social needs and problems - in ways that go beyond the pri­vate gains and general benefits of market activity.”⁵¹

The term social is thus delimited from the private and represents thus also the most considerable and most crucial difference to a classical business entrepreneur and those managers, which belong to the private sector.⁵²

Income and its generation or the financing model are probably the points that are most in focus when it comes to the social value proposition. There is no question that income must be generated because otherwise, the core requirement for economic and entrepreneurial activity would not be met. According to Mulgan, the organization that generates this income is called a "social enterprise."⁵³

Social Enterprises are thus a hybrid form of organization, which simulta­neously strive for social and economic value creation, in which the so- called Double Bottom Line is expressed. This combination of social and economic value creation is also called "blended value." The mentioned social enterprises can be defined and categorized differently. Roder de­scribes, for example, the distinguishing feature of the amount of gener­ated income, the legal form or mission-integrated orientation, mission-re­lated orientation, or unrelated to mission orientation to Alter.⁵⁴

2.3 Examples of Good Practice

In the following chapter, as positive examples, different enterprises are mentioned, which fulfill the characteristics of Social Entrepreneurship and have already established themselves on the respective market. The focus is deliberately placed on the German national market since this work will also deal with the specifics in the national context and therefore has no relation to international companies.

2.3.1 DKMS

"We beat leukemia."^{55 56} One of the first German and probably most suc­cessful example for Social Entrepreneurship is the Deutsche Knochenmarkspenderdatei (DKMS). The DKMS is a non-profit making GmbH, which mediates stem cell donations to blood cancer patients. Be­sides, the aim is to give patients access to therapies.⁵⁷

When Mechtild Harf, wife of DKMS founder Peter Harf, died on September 16,1991, tragedy, grief, and life chances were grotesquely close together. When the trained economist falls ill with acute lymphatic leukemia, her husband immediately begins searching for a suitable donor. But the search in Ludwigshafen presents itself as extremely difficult, since no net­works or databases in Germany to potential donors exist, like, e.g., at this time already in Great Britain and the USA.⁵⁸

In January 1991, Harf then created the initiative "Hilfe für Leukämiekranke"⁵⁹ and found a suitable donor. The ever more success­fully becoming private initiative then finally becomes the DKMS-German marrow donor file non-profit society ltd. in Tübingen officially.⁶⁰

Since then, the bone marrow donor file has stood for its vision of defeating blood cancer. Every blood cancer patient should find a suitable donor or get access to therapies all over the world. The company's mission runs under four critical points: The registration of stem cell donors, making var­ious therapies possible, the further development of therapies, and improv­ing the well-being of all blood cancer patients.⁶¹

The financing of this project succeeds through different branches. The DKMS group belongs beside the DKMS also the DKMS LIFE, and the DKMS Stem Cell bank. The financing of the DKMS is based on two pillars: On the one hand, monetary donations from private individuals and com­panies, on the other hand, reimbursements from the health care systems for the donor file maintenance and the successful placement of a stem cell donorwith a blood cancer patient in search.⁶²

The two-part financing and its efficient management make the DKMS and economically profitable non-profit enterprise. The company is self-sustain­ing and can thus operate independently of state funds. For the develop­ment of the file, the DKMS is dependent, however, despite all successes on financial support by money donors. Since the costs of donor registra­tion are not covered by the respective health insurance companies or the health system, a newly registered donor costs 35 euros once. These costs can either be borne by the donor himself or be financed by donations.⁶³

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 1: Total number of donors at the international entities.⁶⁴

As the annual report of the DKMS of 2019 becomes clear, the majority, the active donors come from Germany. Of the total 9.8 million donors, 6.5 million are from Germany, 1.5 million from Poland, 1.09 million from the USA, 600 thousand from Great Britain, and about 100 thousand from Chile and India.⁶⁵

Figure 2 serves to better illustrate the development of the number of do­nors since 1991 and 2019 and their origin.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2: Development of donor numbers over the years.⁶⁶

“Blood cancer knows no borders. In our quest to help more and more peo­ple, DKMS continues to expand internationally - because of the worldwide fight against blood cancer cells for an intercontinental network.”⁶⁷

As described in the previous DKMS quote on internationalization, Figure 2 also shows that the number of donors, especially in the years from 2005 onwards, is developing more powerfully and rapidly. In addition to the rapid increase in the German national sector, since 2011, DKMS Poland, DKMS USA, DKMS in the UK, and DKMS BST Foundation in India have also been following suit.⁶⁸

Finally, it can be summarized that the DKMS is one of the most successful and first German enterprises of Social Entrepreneurship. The mission and vision to help and heal people through stem cell donations and the provi­sion of a network undisputedly puts the social overall positive benefit to society in the foreground, without aiming for great economic profit. Of course, registrations, therapies, and research must be financed by eco­nomic activity and donations, but these flow into the many projects of the DKMS and not into the management's property. All other facts and figures can be taken from the DKMS Annual Report of 2019.

2.3.2 Viva con Agua

“Viva con Agua is a meaningful community that changes the world posi­tively with joy⁶⁹. A decentralized network of people and organizations works for humane access to clean drinking water and basic sanitation.”⁷⁰

An important name in Social Entrepreneurship in the German market is Viva con Agua. The organization was founded by the former FC St.-Pauli- professional Benjamin Adrion. The goal: to promote water projects in emerging and developing countries. The difference between this and other existing initiatives should be that the money comes from classical donations and the sale of consumer goods such as mineral water. Viva con Agua does not see itself as a beverage producer, since two German companies, "Husumer Mineralbrunnen" and "Privatbrauerei & Mineral­brunnenbetrieb H. Egerer" - fill the water and the brand Viva con Agua and its label should be seen more as a flyer for the association's idea.⁷¹

Depending on the container, 5 to 11 cents license fee goes to the associ­ation, which, after having paid its costs, like employees, can use the profit for charitable projects in Ethiopia or Uganda. Thanks to this strategy, how­ever, the water is priced at the same level as other national brand waters, despite its non-profit background.⁷² Viva con Agua pursues the vision that all people have access to clean drinking water, hygiene facilities, and basic sanitation. 2.2 billion people worldwide have no secure access to clean drinking water. Of these, around 785 million people even lack an essential supply of drinking water.⁷³

Its purpose is based on four core statements:⁷⁴

- Activate: motivating individuals and organizations to participate in a social process of positive change.
- Inspire: Inspiring the society to creatively and actively engage with the global issue of water and water poverty.
- Network: Networking with decentralized supporters to provide a stable platform for positive change.
- Transform: Supporting concrete WASH⁷⁵ projects for a worldwide social change in the sense of “water for all.”⁷⁶

Various priority projects are supported through mineral water sales—for example, John's Rig in Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, about 31% of the population currently has no access to clean drinking water, and even 93% have no access to basic sanitation. To counteract this, the mobile drilling rig "Johns Rig" was used.⁷⁷

More than 200 further planned measures are to be implemented in the area of drinking water supply to create access to clean drinking water and improved sanitary facilities, teach improved hygiene behavior through training, and implement Post Implementation Monitoring Systems to en­sure better monitoring of water systems. Further examples are solar-pow­ered water supply systems in Uganda, or new water supply systems in Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Uganda Karamoja.⁷⁸

In 2019, the total turnover of Viva con Agua de Sankt Pauli e. V. amounts to 4,784,282 Euro. 64% of this revenue comes from donations, which are made up of various sources. 1.7 million Euro donations came in 2019 from individuals and companies alone. Through activities such as collecting de­posits at festivals on a donation basis, more than 1.3 million euros in do­nations were collected in addition to the sensitization work carried out.⁷⁹ 22% of all revenues are from donations, such as the J2XU Foundation, which supports the John's Rig drilling rig, for example.⁸⁰ In 2019, revenues of around 2.4 million euros were achieved through Husumer Mineralbrun­nen and WEPA with the Viva con Agua mineral water, almost 500,000 euros more than in the previous year.This growth from around 5 million to 35.1 million bottles is a big step forward and offers Viva con Agua more and more financial freedom to support social projects worldwide for the distribution of clean tap water.⁸¹

2.3.3 ReCup

Approximately 2.8 billion disposable cups are used annually for coffee-to­go or other hot drinks on the go in Germany. The cups that are thrown away after a single use comes to 320,000 pieces per hour. A widespread social problem, the excessive waste products in disposable products, could be solved by the deposit system for to-go cups from RECUP.⁸²

ReCup's goal is to maintain the "coffee-to-go philosophy" and offer con­sumers and all associated retailers an uncomplicated and worthwhile al­ternative, increasingly eliminating coffee in disposable cups from the pic­ture forever.⁸³

The focus of economic activity is always on the social impact, intending to contribute to society's sustainable development. Simultaneously, the Mu­nich-based company also wants to prove that it can generate a sustaina­ble business model.⁸⁴

In September 2016, the ReCup GbR was founded, and the pilot project was started in Rosenheim. In the beginning, a broad market analysis was necessary to find out how products and processes have to be designed to drive an experienced system from the market and get the customer to change over without too much effort. After extending the project to the entire German market, the GmbH was founded. In 2017 ReCup decided to merge with JustSwapIt., the Berlin deposit system, and communicated under the ReCup brand since March 2017. Since then, ReCup's mission has offered an innovative and sustainable returnable system for coffee- to-go cups while maintaining the "coffee-to-go philosophy. The vision is a comprehensive strategy to revolutionize the coffee-to-go business and make coffee in disposable cups disappear from the scene forever.⁸⁵

The German deposit system serves as a model for the system process. This process is an established process for the German target group and can therefore be adapted quickly if it is followed. The recyclable cups, the RECUPs, can be used up to 1000 times each, and thus such a cup re­places up to 1000 disposable cups. However, the cups are not sold but financed by a system fee paid by the partners, who in this way help keep the deposit system sustainable.⁸⁶

For end customers, the process looks like this. They order their coffee from one of the partners in the RECUP and deposit a 1€ deposit for the cup. To get the deposit back, empty cups can be returned to all RECUP partners throughout Germany. The cups are cleaned on-site and then re­turned to the system.⁸⁷

Coffee suppliers and restaurateurs do not have a much more complicated way either. They can register as a partner with RECUP and then borrow the cups for a fee of one euro. The cups are thus a transitory item, as they are flexible in their acceptance and delivery. In addition to the deposit fee, partners are charged a system fee, which includes the provision of an app as an overview, the cup logistics, and the usage rights.⁸⁸

Due to the corona pandemic and the increased use of to-go food, the Fed­eral Republic has recorded about 10 percent more packaging waste since March 2020. As a result, in June 2020, the German government imple­mented the EU directive adopted at the end of2018 to phase out dispos­able tableware. A landmark decision and a substantial opportunity for Re­Cup to expand its network, as restaurateurs and other traders will increas­ingly be forced to resort to environmentally friendly options. With 36 em­ployees and nearly 5,000 partner cafés, bakeries, kiosks, and gas sta­tions, ReCup is working on expanding the system nationwide and offering both coffee providers and coffee connoisseurs an easy way to buy coffee and offer coffee connoisseurs an uncomplicated, attractive, and green al­ternative to disposable cups, which will soon all be banned in Germany.⁸⁹

2.4 Definition and Characteristics of Social Entrepreneurs

While there is no single definition of a Social Entrepreneur in the literature, there are many approaches and the most defining characteristics and mo­tivation of such entrepreneurs to describe.⁹⁰ In this chapter, a definition for Social Entrepreneurs will be found and established.

A Social Entrepreneur's focus is preferably on an understanding of recog­nizing opportunities and taking advantage of chances and possibilities than on explicit characteristics and attributions of the acting persons. For example, Gartner describes that the process-oriented view of an entre­preneur can be understood as creating their own space through their ac­tions - "Entrepreneurship is what entrepreneurs do." Thus, Social Entrepreneurship can be simplified as the actions of a Social Entrepre­neur.

A widely used definition is that of a Social Entrepreneur who primarily wants to solve a social problem and uses entrepreneurial actions and ap­proaches to achieve this. Thomas Druyen describes, for example, that the ability to act entrepreneurially and charitably at the same time, to create synergies and to create something new at the same time, in order to rec­ognize social imbalances and to compensate for them efficiently, is a core description of the characteristics of a Social Entrepreneur.^{91 92}

In this context, Leppert describes more deeply that all Social Entrepre­neurs are united by the need to solve a concretely existing social problem and dedicate themselves to solving this problem out of conviction. This happens even under aggravating circumstances and in the face of re­sistance with the same conviction and motivation. This conviction often brings the same or similar characteristics, such as determination, impa­tience, and persuasiveness. However, this is not a condition as a funda­mental characteristic for a Social Entrepreneur but is merely so, or very similar, in many cases.⁹³

It can also be argued that in the past decades, Social Entrepreneurs have made a decisive contribution to enabling people to live a more humane existence by implementing their visions and to immensely improving their quality of life in the short and long term.⁹⁴

Another approach described by psychotherapist Praszkier of Warsaw Uni­versity and his co-authors describes Social Entrepreneurs as ethical indi­viduals who solve major social problems through new approaches.⁹⁵

For this work, Social Entrepreneurs are described as people with an eco­nomic interest who do not see this as meaningless and purely entrepre­neurial but who want to solve a problem for society as a whole by rethink­ing traditional procedures and structures and establishing innovative ap­proaches to solving problems in the market through perseverance, deter­mination, and persuasiveness. Social Entrepreneurs are highly motivated by the vision of social impact and their high ethical standards for them­selves and their economic actions.

[...]

---

¹ Cp. Henkel (2015)

² Cp. Fridays for Future

³ Cp. Berlitz (2017)

⁴ Cp. Roder (2011), 32

⁵ Cp. Center of Economic Prosperty and Freedom (2018)

⁶ Cp. Virgin

⁷ Cp. Center of Economic Prosperty and Freedom (2018)

⁸ Cp. Heinecke (2017)

⁹ Cp. Scheurle/Knust/Then (2013), 50-53

¹⁰ Cp. Leppert(2013),13

¹¹ Cp. Scheurle/Knust/Then (2013), 50-53

¹² Cp. Leppert(2013),13

¹³ Cp. Scheurle/Knust/Then (2013), 50-53

¹⁴ Cp. Händel (2019)

¹⁵ Cp. The Nobel Prize (2006)

¹⁶ Cp. Frischen/Lawaldt (2008), 2-4

¹⁷ Cp. Sommerrock (2010), 69-71

¹⁸ Cp. Leppert (2013), 20-23

¹⁹ Cp. Faltin (2008), 31-33

²⁰ Cp. Roder (2011), 32

²¹ Cp. Roder (2011), 33

²² Cp. Fallgatter (2002), 20

²³ Cp. Boschee (1995), 2

²⁴ Cp. Kieser/Kubicek (1976), 1

²⁵ Cp. Boschee(1995),2

²⁶ Cp. Roder (2011), 40

²⁷ Cp. Kieser/Kubicek (1976), 1

²⁸ Cp. Roder, (2011), 41

²⁹ Cp. Roder, (2011), 42

³⁰ Cp. Szyperski/Nathusius (1999), 27-29

³¹ Cp. Roder (2011), 43

³² Cp. Anderson/Dees (2006),155-161

³³ Cp. Roder (2011), 46-48

³⁴ Cp. Roder (2011), 45-47

³⁵ Cp. Roder (2011), 45-47

³⁶ Cp. Roder (2011), 45

³⁷ Cp. Roder (2011), 45-46

³⁸ Cp. Roder (2011), 45-47

³⁹ Cp. Roder (2011), 45-47

⁴⁰ Cp. Roder (2011), 48

⁴¹ Cp. Thompson (2008), 151-154

⁴² Cp. Volkmann/Tokarski (2006), 85.

⁴³ Cp. Welsch (2005), 32.

⁴⁴ Cp. Phills Jr./Deiglmeier/Miller (2008), 37.

⁴⁵ Cp. Bergmann/Daub (2006), 54.

⁴⁶ Cp. Volkmann/Tokarski (2006), 90

⁴⁷ Cp. Roder (2011), 50

⁴⁸ Cp. Volkmann/Tokarski (2006), 90-92

⁴⁹ Cp. Volkmann/Tokarski (2006), 90-92

⁵⁰ Cp. Roder (2011), 53

⁵¹ Cp. Phills Jr./Deiglmeier/Miller (2008), 39

⁵² Cp. Roder (2011), 54-56

⁵³ Cp. Mulgan (2006), 79-83

⁵⁴ Cp. Alter (2004), 16-19

⁵⁵ Engl.: German bone marrow donation

⁵⁶ Mission of DKMS in german: „Wir besiegen Blutkrebs“

⁵⁷ Cp. Dreyer (2018)

⁵⁸ Cp. DKMS

⁵⁹ Engl.: help for leukemia patients

⁶⁰ Cp. DKMS Media Center (2017)

⁶¹ Cp. DKMS

⁶² Cp DKMS

⁶³ Cp. DKMS

⁶⁴ Cp. Annual Report DKMS

⁶⁵ Cp. Annual Report DKMS

⁶⁶ Cp. Annual Report DKMS

⁶⁷ Cp. Annual Report DKMS

⁶⁸ Cp. DKMS

⁶⁹ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷⁰ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷¹ Cp. Dünnebacke (2018)

⁷² Cp. Dünnebacke (2018)

⁷³ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷⁴ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷⁵ WASH = Water, Sanitary und Hygiene

⁷⁶ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷⁷ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷⁸ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁷⁹ Cp. Viva con Agua Annual

⁸⁰ Cp. Viva con Agua

⁸¹ Cp. Viva con Agua Annual

⁸² Cp. Plastikalternative

⁸³ Cp. ReCup

⁸⁴ Cp. ReCup

⁸⁵ Cp. ReCup

⁸⁶ Cp. ReCup

⁸⁷ Cp. Plastikalternative

⁸⁸ Cp. Blauer Engel

⁸⁹ Cp. ReCup Press release

⁹⁰ Cp. Korber (2015), 13

⁹¹ Cp. Leppert(2013), 83

⁹² Cp. Korber (2015), 14

⁹³ Cp. Leppert(2013), 83

⁹⁴ Cp. Korber (2015), 15

⁹⁵ Cp. Korber (2015), 17