Week 4 Post- Do we need more Danones?

We are now 4 weeks into learning about individuals and companies who have developed innovative solutions to large social problems around the world. From PlumpyNut to Tata, people are finding new ways to change lives for those most in need. While I can see the social innovation in the work of these companies, I cannot say I see the same thing in Danone's work. Should they really be considered social innovators if their only goal was to expand their customer base? Danone realized that their customer base was only a small portion of "wealthy" people that could afford their products- mostly in the US and Europe. Knowing that these western nations were not the epicenter of population growth in the world, Danone knew they were missing out. The WSJ piece noted that in Indonesia in particular, Danone's products were initially only affordable to 20 million of the 240 million people in the country. Being able to develop a new, more affordable yogurt product allowed them to reach more people - but I ask, where is the social innovation? Was Danone trying to address malnutrition? Were they trying to increase wealth for anyone other than themselves? Although they did partner with Muhammas Yunnus, the focus was on getting their product to more people so that their work in Bangladesh was more profitable. The "social" part is missing in this social business. I don't fault them for trying to make money. Afterall, no money, no mission. But the question is should they be touted as social innovators when the mission is to make more money and not to help those in need? Perhaps the yogurt products they developed were an innovation; but what change in world did they actually bring? Whose life did they change for the better? If we look at the elements of innovation, Danone pretty much fails. While perhaps the on-the-go yogurt did provide some type of novelty; it was lacking in bringing a real improvement and it clearly wasn't sustainable. The folks at Danone are nothing more than strategic, clever business men and women -and even that can be questioned when looking at success (or lack thereof) of their product distribution in these other countries. They are not, however, social innovators. I think this definition needs to be reserved for the Nicholas Negroponte's (One Laptop Per Child) and the Sam Goldman's (D.Light) of the world.