Introduction
For the customers, the social enterprise provides a sense of ownership, new social interactions, job opportunities, and a feeling of optimism. Our ability to spread throughout the nation in the next several years is also possible because of this. There should be more focus on social entrepreneurship. The Social Entrepreneurship in Mental Health (SEMH) research group uses social entrepreneurship as a theoretical framework to advance our understanding of attaining mental health justice. The objective is to learn from individuals who have successfully implemented novel ideas into high-quality services, explain the models on which these services are based and the policy implications of their work, and promote new ways to tackle our society’s expanding health inequities. Low-income countries are plagued by a lack of qualified mental health care providers and experts. In the face of the most challenging societal conditions, social innovation may succeed. The phrase “social entrepreneur” refers to people and organizations that thrive in the face of adversity and severe resource limits while also mobilizing social capital to support long-term solutions.
The Essential Qualities of Social Entrepreneurship in Mental Health Equity:
- One of the most innovative approaches to mental health challenges (broadly defined).
- The new approach’s financial and other viability has been shown by its successful deployment.
- An essential paradigm for the future, this approach can be used across various jurisdictions and periods.
It’s common for individuals to experience mental illness, trauma, and pain. If we look at the national balance sheet regarding lost productivity, hospitalizations, and health care costs, it is clear that people’s lives are damaged. More than 20 years greater life expectancy for persons with significant mental health issues (Chankamon and Chantaranamchoo, 2021). To put it another way, it’s almost hard to estimate the total cost of individuals being unable to depend on their judgment because they have no one to turn to.
Discussion
An enormous number of individuals have been negatively impacted by austerity because of mental illness, despair, and trauma due to the lowering of government benefits services and the closure of various non-profit organizations. People who cannot work because of a mental condition are losing out on disability payments because the benefits are being cut and then increased again. Hundreds of pounds might reduce the monthly social security payments if people cannot work. This subsidy was used to determine the amount of council housing aid that may be awarded depending on the availability of spare rooms (Bose, Dong, and Simpson, 2019). To pay for any ‘extra rooms,’ a single person would have to dip into their savings. If a person misses an appointment or is seen as not working hard enough to find work, they may face benefit penalties that reduce their income to zero for weeks. In some circumstances, a £10 yearly direct debit may be excessive. Whatever the price we tried to cut, we couldn’t get our magazine into the hands of those who were interested.
Countries and regions differ significantly in mental health treatment quality and accessibility. Diverse healthcare systems exist throughout countries; some are private, such as the NHS in the U.K. and most of Europe’s healthcare systems as a whole (Olofsson, Hoveskog, and Halila, 2018). In nations where insurance-based healthcare is increasingly common, people have greater freedom of choice. Certain countries have hybrid systems in place where some products are provided to people in need, while others are solely available to those who can afford to purchase them. Certain countries lack access to mental health services. On a global and local scale, wealth inequality harms those with mental health issues, trauma, or other issues.
As a result of the free market, numerous “mental health” goods solely benefit those already rich rather than those in need. By teaching users particular behaviors, motivating them to collect data, teaching a specific technique, connecting them to “a community,” or offering information and “inspiration,” there are five primary ways that apps claiming to aid with mental health help: There are very few programs or services available online that can be shown to work in a therapeutic setting or that address people’s day-to-day concerns (Islam, 2020). This is because anything that claims to have a significant moral effect is subject to the same entrance conditions as pharmaceuticals. One can reap the benefits of developing something that has a quantifiable impact on people’s mental well-being only if it is sold in bulk to health care providers or health insurance companies because those who will benefit most from the product are also those who lack resources, knowledge and potentially high-spec technology to use it.
The organization uses organizational and resource integration to create value. Entrepreneurship in mental health may seem challenging at times due to the lack of particular markets to target or a barrier to entry into the present industry. Things are always going in and out of vogue. In the 1970s and 1980s, companies were routinely ‘trained’ to accept workers who struggled with depression or other mental illnesses. Mental Health First Aid is an excellent example. Certified trainers work for a franchise, teaching a predetermined curriculum to pupils in their region. We choose them because of their previous job experience. Apps for measuring mood and meditative practices were plentiful. There will be an increasing demand for virtual reality in the future years. Patronizing bakeries and cafés run by people who have experienced mental illness, sadness, or tragedy were formerly fashionable. TED talks are captivated by ideas from burgeoning start-ups (Satar, 2020). Until it’s sucked dry and digested, everything looks to happen in an instant. The most often asked question is, “Can you help me discover some persons with mental health concerns to test my project?” Social entrepreneurship in mental health, in my opinion, faces the most significant challenge and most incredible opportunity.
The best ideas originate from someone who properly understands the issue they have uncovered and then validates what that problem signifies for the people who have it on four different levels. People with mental health illnesses sometimes have a different perspective on the difficulties they confront than mental health experts do (Davies, Haugh, and Chambers, 2019). Too much time is spent teaching the poor about budgeting rather than preventing them from sliding into poverty. Focusing on the challenges and difficulties people experience rather than on individuals is more likely to lead to success in social entrepreneurship efforts aimed at improving mental health Focusing on low-cost goods or services or incorporating components related to mental health into existing successful company models seems to me to be where the potential lie gave market circumstances and the reality that many around them aren’t going through the same issues.
In a surprising number of ways, mental health and inequality are intertwined. Every country’s mental health market and geography must be considered while developing global mental health solutions. At the Westminster government’s Global Mental Health Summit in London, lectured by a group of white British people as though we were superior to the country, which operates hostile environments, has long waiting lists, and actively works to make it difficult for people with mental health difficulties to get the money they need. They treated us as though we were better than our country—the quality of your mental well-being influences the quality of your physical surroundings and vice versa. The material well-being of individuals is an essential factor for social entrepreneurship. Problem solution is much superior to brainstorming. Having more excellent mental health will improve people’s lives. We’ll do a better job than they ever could of implementing and sustaining this.
As a result, patients do not see the implementation as a danger since it encourages everyone to interact equally. Reintegration back into society is easier for patients who have been exposed to a variety of potentially helpful treatments via community therapy. The patients’ self-esteem and prospects for reintegration into society are improved when they make music together. Compared to other methods, the organization is inexpensive, simple to implement, and can be used in various formal organizations (Pathak, Poudel, and Acharya, 2018). Reject the feelings of pity and fear that people have for sick persons and work for their integration into everyday life and support for their rehabilitation, whether or not they are in a facility. His study primarily focuses on coping with the ever-increasing drug epidemic. When it comes to Kedar’s non-custodial, participatory methods to mental health care, he sees now as an ideal moment.
Success in social companies is characterized by their capacity to address the demands of society while concentrating on the development of their company. Several industry sectors have taken a different approach to evaluate a company’s success in the marketplace. There are several ways a company’s success may be judged, including its profit margins or the rate at which it grows (Bose, Dong, and Simpson, 2019). After three years of operation, an organization may be regarded entrepreneurially successful. For example, a company’s goodwill has been connected to these outcomes. Despite several research on corporate performance, there is a wide variety of views on what defines success in the workplace. It is possible to measure a person’s success based on their knowledge and money. Society’s most universal indices of success are financial well-being and public image, which people are believed to strive to enhance. Some argue that the entrepreneur’s self-esteem has a significant role in their success. Many studies have indicated that the most significant factors in a company’s success are governance, money, and social capital. Many factors contribute to the success of a business.
More social entrepreneurs mean more competition for increasingly limited financial resources like grants. Because of this, the need for social impact assessment is on the rise because funders and other interested parties are putting more significant pressure on social firms to prove their social value (Clifford, 2013). As the gap between the rich and poor widens, governments’ inability to address social and environmental issues and a global trend toward privatization, the rise of social entrepreneurship is no surprise. They know exactly what they want to do, how they want to get there, and who they can rely on to help them get there. With their vision, they lead them to hitherto unexplored avenues. Because they can define their vision to their workers and investors, they have a good grasp of where they want to go. Entrepreneurs that participate in networking activities may be able to meet potential coworkers. The rapidity with which an entrepreneur makes decisions is essential to their firm’s long-term success. Entrepreneurs must make quick, intelligent judgments to avoid losing out on chances (Steiner and Teasdale, 2019). To make an informed judgment, a brief examination of the facts is necessary. These traits may help you rise to the top by enhancing your professionalism and self-confidence as a corporate leader. A successful entrepreneur doesn’t matter if they’re born or made. Learn and cultivate entrepreneurial qualities for leaders to flourish.
A social enterprise’s primary objective is to maximize added value and social benefits, focusing on purpose and service, in contrast to a private-sector company. Since social sector organizations cannot charge their customers enough for the services they provide, as well as because they rely on volunteers and persons willing to work for less than market salaries, they are significantly reliant on external financing sources. The different traits and contrasts between commercial and public sector organizations account for critical success criteria. On the other hand, some apply equally to private and public enterprises.
The absence of profit as the principal motor of social sector operations may be partly compensated by high levels of staff engagement provided by a successful and charismatic leader. One of the obstacles to development may be a lack of awareness among public workers or inconsistent standards for applying these laws and processes; therefore, legislators should pay attention to the CSF, a legal/regulatory environment that facilitates growth (Islam, 2020). There is an excellent need for instruments that make the present judicial system more accessible to the general public. The ability to generate revenue and share knowledge about public services are two of the most critical benefits of partnering with government entities. Society may benefit from the contributions of third-sector institutions such as non-profit organizations, which play a vital role in delivering social services. For this reason, public-social partnerships must get substantial financial support, as well as an emphasis on genuine cooperation and long-term solutions to social problems that include all stakeholders in society. The idea’s originality and simplicity might lead to private financing for the project.
Modern firms competing in today’s turbulent market demand a flurry of complex rules. They must be able to adapt to changing circumstances. In the present climate, social companies need to change their attention to more efficient and productive organizations. The public’s perception of entrepreneurship has undergone a significant transformation (Davies, Haugh, and Chambers, 2019). Entrepreneurs don’t need to have a positive impact on society to be an entrepreneur. The first step in social business management should be to determine which components are most essential for success. These criteria dictate which areas, procedures, and processes should be supported for the organization’s success in which domains strategic decisions should be adopted. Considerations such as these are crucial, especially for charities now coping with significant operational challenges.
The intention may serve as a proxy for actual behavior, although this is more likely to be when a purpose immediately follows an action. Since social entrepreneurs are expected to engage in activities such as seeking financial and non-financial resources and experimenting with new techniques, there is an issue here (Bose, Dong, and Simpson, 2019). One of the most essential characteristics of social entrepreneurs is their constant desire to care about the well-being of others, as well as to feel concerned and empathy for them and act in their best interests. Research on the effects of moral agency, altruism, and values on people’s motivation to participate in S.E. has so far concentrated mainly on the influence of social psychology and ethics.
Socialized healthcare in a society where mental illness is frequently misunderstood necessitates consideration of both ethical and practical difficulties. G.P. at hand, an app from Babylon Health that lets users video chat with physicians, is one of the most popular and well-liked solutions. This new service opens the door for disruption. There were also initial concerns about whether or not a Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) that hosted the virtual surgery would be able to assist its actual non-virtual patients. They were registered with real-life general practitioners (Norinah, 2020). It’s important to test things that might positively or negatively impact people’s lives. To attempt to get access to someone’s brain is a serious felony.
Like any other business owner, a social entrepreneur understands that success needs initiative. While social entrepreneurs have different leadership styles, they all understand honing their management and leadership skills. Social entrepreneurs also seek team members and partners committed to the company’s objective. Having a clear vision and seizing the reins means financial benefit and a good influence on society for a social entrepreneur. In our everyday lives, disruption and innovation are commonplace. Some people say that fortune favors the brave, and this is true in the world of charity, where one of the most challenging challenges is dealing with people’s daily problems. Because social entrepreneurs are forced to design unique solutions to the issues they are attempting to tackle, they must value innovation. Learning from the past and developing a public-beneficial programming plan is vital.
The idea of a better future that many social entrepreneurs have is frequently unmet. Entrepreneurs with a social purpose are continually looking for new methods to succeed financially and socially. These entrepreneurs are well aware of the challenges they face due to their distinctive blend of economic and social good initiatives. It is critical to express one’s vision and encourage others to do the same. For social entrepreneurs who want to inspire their fans and followers, communicating effectively with people is essential. To be a successful social entrepreneur, you must believe in yourself and your work. They must also be enthusiastic about developing the solution (Norinah, 2020). Nothing else like it exists in the business world. Individuals who are deeply dedicated to a specific cause or field of effort are often the driving force behind developing a social business. They recognize and believe that the world can be better, but they must take the first step. They have unwavering confidence in their skills. They make sure that a compelling vision excites and motivates people while putting together a team of specialists and team members to assist bring the firm to life.
Conclusion
The difficulties of the social sector are linked with social, cultural, and political concerns. On the other hand, many businesses would instead function in isolation than form partnerships. During a company’s early expansion phases, striking the correct balance between profit and purpose, mission and revenue, may be difficult. Some social enterprises are for-profit companies, while others are charitable organizations. Others are a combination of the two. The entrepreneurial and social innovation revolutions generated many ideas, case studies, and models for many of them. Like any other business owner, social entrepreneurs understand the need for endurance and persistence in their activities. There will always be some protest or pushback when someone tries to develop a beneficial social impact company. Entrepreneurs who want to make a difference in the lives of others are often challenged to describe why their solution is better than previous attempts. Consequently, social entrepreneurs must maintain a diplomatic demeanor while dealing with the general public, investors, the media, and their team members, as they are often building a fresh and inventive solution to a societal issue (Tkhoryk, and Parashchuk, 2019). Social entrepreneurs must map out their trajectory, make course corrections, and keep their long-term economic goals in mind.
Poverty is being reduced globally, educational possibilities are being expanded, and the economy is becoming more accessible to those who want it. Customers increasingly demand a higher degree of social responsibility from the companies with which they do business. Social entrepreneurship allows entrepreneurs to earn while also making a difference in their communities. When company leaders better know what social entrepreneurship entails, everyone benefits.
References
Bose, S., Dong, G. and Simpson, A., 2019. The Cooperative Movement and Social Enterprise. In The Financial Ecosystem (pp. 369-391). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
CHANKAMON, W. and Chantaranamchoo, N., 2021. CONDITIONS FOR THE SUCCESS OF THE SOCIAL ENTERPRISE OPERATION OF COMMUNITY IN SUPHANBURI PROVINCE (Doctoral dissertation, Silpakorn University).
Davies, I.A., Haugh, H., and Chambers, L., 2019. Barriers to social enterprise growth. Journal of Small Business Management, 57(4), 1616-1636.
Islam, S.M., 2020. Unintended consequences of scaling social impact through ecosystem growth strategy in social enterprise and social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 13, p.e00159.
Norah, M.A., 2020. The practice of Waqf land development in Malaysia: A social enterprise business perspective/Norinah Mohd Ali (Doctoral dissertation, University of Malaya).
Olofsson, S., Hoveskog, M. and Halila, F., 2018. Journey and impact of business model innovation: The case of a social enterprise in the Scandinavian electricity retail market. Journal of cleaner production, 175, pp.70-81.
Pathak, R.R., Poudel, B.R. and Acharya, P.E., 2018. Social enterprise and social entrepreneurship: conceptual clarity and implication in Nepalese context. NCC Journal, 3(1), pp.143-152.
Satar, M.S., 2020. Analysing the differences in the importance of social entrepreneurship critical success factors across social enterprise demographics. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 41(4), pp.562-583.
Steiner, A. and Teasdale, S., 2019. Unlocking the potential of rural social enterprise. Journal of Rural Studies, 70, pp.144-154.
Theory, J. and Parashchuk, A., 2019. SOCIAL ENTERPRISE.
write