mission-oriented companies are often defined by a unique mission that maybe others don’t think is important, whereas a lot of the social entrepreneurship efforts gravitate towards things where you have many copycats doing relatively similar things.
From an interview with Ezra Klein. Pointer from Tyler Cowen.
One of the main recommendations of the Colander-Kupers book is to expand what they call the “for-benefit” sector. By that, they mean corporations that seek both profits and social benefits. To be fair, they tout this more as an alternative to government programs than as an alternative to profit-maximizing firms. As you know, I have been given to ranting against non-profits, on more than one occasion.
I believe that Hobby Lobby believes itself to be mission driven (they do in fact pay their employees considerably higher than in comparable retail jobs.) However, I think that recent litigation demonstrated that only some missions are considered legitimate by most people (namely, missions with which they agree.)