Chapter 2: Varieties of Entrepreneurship
Women are much more likely to be deterred from cycling due to concerns about road safety. So, perhaps it’s not surprising to find several examples of female innovators developing cycling safety products. This case study includes two examples of female entrepreneurs who have innovated cycling safety products. Download the full case study here: Chapter 02 case study
Chapter 2: Questions
1. With regard to the different types of entrepreneur identified in Section 2.2 of the text, how would you categorise the female cycling-safety entrepreneurs here?
Guidance answer:
Like many entrepreneurs these case studies fit across several categories.
Both companies can be defined as ‘technology entrepreneurs’. Both companies are based on innovative product development, which is unique and cutting edge, as evidenced by the fact that they have been able to secure patents to protect their innovations.
In addition, they could also be seen as ‘eco-entrepreneurs’. Safer and more attractive cycling products are likely to encourage more people to cycle and therefore reduce carbon emissions through reduced carbon emissions.
Both groups of founders have social and environmental as well as commercial objectives and so may be defined as ‘social entrepreneurs’. However, whether they succeed in meeting those ‘triple bottom line’ objectives would require further investigation.
2. In Section 2.5, Elkington states that social enterprises’ success often depends upon their ability to satisfy the three-pronged fork of profitability, environmental quality and social justice. Based on the information available here, how would you assess Hovding and Blaze in terms of those three tests?
Guidance answer:
Profitability
Both companies appear to have managed to attract significant levels of seed investment and have established themselves as commercially viable. It remains early days in terms of sales, growth and profitability, as evidenced by numbers of units sold and staff numbers.
Environmental quality
Both Hövding and Blaze are firmly aimed at supporting and encouraging more people to cycle and therefore reduce carbon emissions. Environmental quality is central to both companies’ missions.
Social justice
Personal safety and improved health are issues of social justice and central to the missions of both companies. However, compared to mainstream helmets and lights, those innovative products are very expensive and consequently inaccessible to people on lower incomes. There is no evidence that either of the companies has plans to make their products more affordable and accessible.
