As social entrepreneurship has surged as a field dedicated to transforming inequities through the power of inclusion, what's emerged is a profound culture of exclusion.

In the landscape of competitive funding and make-or-break outcomes, entrepreneurs want to work with people who are adaptable, have high learning curves and who can make immediate, measurable returns on investments to realize deeply transformative ideas. And the talent who fit this criteria, governing the senior levels of most nonprofits and social enterprises, are predominantly highly educated individuals who are remarkably capable but do not represent the demographics of those they serve. This is not to say these individuals are not well-intentioned or directly engaged in excluding others. We are speaking to a larger trend in which the people being supported by the social sector are rarely represented in meaningful, organizational leadership roles.

The social entrepreneurship space has been overshadowed by what we term “celebrity social entrepreneurs” (Chelsea Clinton, Daniel Lubetzky, Cliff Burrow, etc.) who, by virtue of their status and brand recognition, headline “premiere” networking spaces (TED Talks, StartupWeekend, Net Impact, etc.). This is not just a national trend — it also exists at regional and local levels. Co-working hubs, essentially shared office space, are led and populated by degree-holding thought leaders, not the people their organizations actually service.

This reality demonstrates how social entrepreneurship is a field primarily accessible to those who come from socio-economically privileged backgrounds — and largely inaccessible to those who don't. Our work in the social sector has been largely possible because of stable upbringings, family support and privilege. As social entrepreneurs, we have a responsibility to acknowledge this privilege and empower individuals who have experienced social or economic injustice to be the future leaders of our movements. Today's landscape involves the ultra-privileged speaking on behalf of the less privileged. Even when we do give the excluded a chance to speak for themselves, we are giving them access to the systems we have created, instead of giving them the autonomy to create their own. Addressing this disparity involves elevating these individuals into positions of high-impact leadership at the core of an organization's infrastructure.

This is not a knock on the people and places who work tirelessly to make the world a more equitable place but a call to be conscientious in designing spaces, events and leadership teams that reflect the social and economic diversity of those the social sector represents. By prioritizing local leadership and designing spaces for lower-income communities to exercise their agency and pursue professional development in the same vein that co-working hubs allow for more privileged individuals, we can start shaping a field that more closely mirrors the values upon which it claims to thrive.

Three Baltimore organizations that do this daily are the Covenant Community Association (CCA), Medicine For The Greater Good (MGG), and the Baltimore Urban Debate League (BUDL). CCA, run by long-time community members Elroy and Cleo Christopher, has used local leadership in East Baltimore for over three decades to tackle gang violence, environmental stewardship, and remedial education. The organization is run and supported by community members, whose inclusiveness has brought deep-seated cultural change to the Luzerne Avenue community.

MGG is led by physicians at Johns Hopkins Bayview. But look at the group's on-ground leadership, and you will see local pastors, churches, teachers and community members at the helm of health initiatives and leadership in more than 17 Baltimore city ZIP codes, with the hospital team simply facilitating and supporting a community's own ideas on how to tackle their health needs.

BUDL has elevated its own students into program manager positions, a process that empowers students to largely direct debate topics that matter most to them, as well as the larger programming and goals of the organization.

As social entrepreneurs ourselves, we recognize that we have leveraged the very events, spaces and hiring models that we've criticized as too exclusionary. We are absolutely not exempt from criticism. We apply to elite fellowships. We speak at TEDx events and other panels. We pursue all of these opportunities to grow our networks and continue providing our services. At the same time, we actively struggle every day to engage in a process that promotes the elitist culture of social impact.

Moving forward, we will strive to be more conscientious about how we can collectively build more inclusive organizations and spaces that reflect who we as a society serve, not just in our mission statements, but in the bedrock of our movements' structures. Will you?

Bobby Moore (bobbymoore570@gmail.com) received a master's degree in urban education from the Johns Hopkins University and was an educator in West Baltimore for four years. Adil Qureshi (adilq14@gmail.com) is a first-year MBA student at Johns Hopkins. Siddhi Sundar (siddhi.sundar@gmail.com) is a storyteller and filmmaker.