Search results

Purpose: This literature review aims to answer the calls for further exploration of scaling challenges and opportunities for social entrepreneurs (SEs). We address the scaling issue of social entrepreneurship through the theoretical lens of sustainable business models. Methodology: This paper investigates, on a multilevel approach, 340 journal articles published in one of the 20 peer-reviewed journals in management, entrepreneurship, CSR, organizational behavior, and nonprofit. It also considers influential articles due to their relatively high citation count (i.e., more than 150 times) outside of those selected journals. This paper furthermore analyses in-depth 32 scaling articles. Findings: This study positions the topics of social entrepreneurship over the last decades, together with the six types of scaling strategies: scaling up, scaling down, scaling across, scaling deep, scaling out, and diversification. It also discusses 15 challenges related to the scaling efforts by SEs. It furthermore elaborates on potential leads for research and practice regarding scaling social impact. Social Implications: There are many pathways for SEs to increase their impact on society, even though it remains quite challenging to achieve for most. Understanding what possibilities or limitations apply to individual SEs is but a first step in developing the full potential of social entrepreneurship. Originality: This paper approaches scaling from three complementary levels of analysis, i.e., individual, organizational, and institutional. Thus we provide more clarity and a nuanced perspective on past and future research regarding scaling challenges and opportunities.

Based on six case studies of self-proclaimed social enterprises (SEs) in Kenya, this paper aims to critically assess the “SE” concept in a base of the pyramid (BoP) context.

The paper draws on multiple case studies to challenge traditional notions of SE. Six SEs operating at the BoP in Kenya are analysed. Interviews are conducted with entrepreneurs from each enterprise, during which the enterprises’ business models are mapped and scrutinised.

Based on the six case studies, the paper argues that the SE concept is challenged in a BoP context: the six Kenyan SEs viewed social and commercial orientation as equally important and mutually supportive; viewed social orientation as a competitive advantage; and did not consider social objectives as harmonious. These findings corroborate key claims of the BoP literature, e.g. that it is not possible meaningfully to distinguish social and commercial missions at the BoP as they are intertwined; that any company succeeding at the BoP will have a social impact; and that the pursuit of some social objectives may undermine the achievement of other social objectives. The overall conclusion of the paper is that in BoP environments, the concept of SE becomes illusive.

This paper adds perspective to existing literature on SE at the BoP and provides empirical evidence that can help shape the understanding of social business activities in East Africa. The paper demonstrates that in BoP environments, the boundaries between social and commercial enterprise become illusive.

This paper aims to explain why Fairtrade International (FI), an organization committed to empowering the producers of Fairtrade certified products, at times (paradoxically), excluded them from its highest bodies of governance. A within-case study of Fairtrade’s inclusive and exclusive reforms over 25 years, along with insights from the social enterprise, hybrid governance and political sociology literatures, is used to generate several propositions about how voluntary sustainability standards-setting organizations (VSSSOs) engage stakeholders – especially producers – in governance.

This study uses process-tracing methodology, which focuses on the sequential, intervening processes that link potentially important variables within a single case. It draws on data from over 100 interviews and nearly 6,000 archival documents collected from FI and its member Max Havelaar Netherlands. Causal process observations were extracted from the documents and compiled to create a 68,000-word chronological narrative used to evaluate six potential explanations of Fairtrade’s governance reforms: legitimacy, resources, identity, oligarchic tendency, leadership and producer mobilization.

This study finds that Fairtrade’s inclusion/exclusion of producers reflected its desire to increase its moral legitimacy among external actors and understanding of how to signal legitimacy. The discussion proposes that VSSSOs, especially in times of heightened competition, leverage their comparative advantages to differentiate themselves from other organizations. In cases (like FI) in which the advantage is legitimacy, changing notions of legitimacy may have a destabilizing effect on governance.

This evidence-based account of FI’s governance decisions should help resolve some debates about the nature of FI’s relationship with producer groups. The broader propositions offer guidance for future cross-case research aiming to explain VSSSOs’ governance structure and hybrid governance, more generally. Because FI includes producers in governance to a much greater extent than most VSSSOs, it is an important case.

As hybrid organizations become increasingly common, the authors observe that some hybrid forms are becoming institutionalized and legitimated. The authors explore the implications of the institutionalization of hybridity, addressing both the internal tensions that plague many hybrids and the external tensions stemming from evaluator assessments and stakeholder uncertainty. The authors propose that institutionalization can dampen internal tensions associated with hybridity and also facilitate legitimation and acceptance by external audiences. The authors present identity as a useful theoretical lens through which to examine these questions, as identities are born from, but also have the potential to modify, existing institutional arrangements. The authors present directions for future research at the juncture of identity, hybridity, and institutionalization, suggesting potential avenues of inquiry in this productive stream of research.

This paper proposes to rethink the concepts of relevance and usefulness and their relation to the theory–practice gap in management research.

On the basis of the cognitive-linguistic relevance theory or inferential pragmatics, supplemented by insights from information science, we define relevance as a general conceptual category, while reserving usefulness for the instrumental application in a particular case.

There is no reason to hold onto the difference between theoretical and practical relevance, nor to distinguish between instrumental and conceptual relevance.

This novel approach will help to clarify the confusion in the field and contribute to a better understanding of the added value of management research.

The purpose of this paper is to explore bricolage as the missing link in understanding how cross-sector social partnerships form and operate in response to grand challenges. It is proposed that the weaving together of resources employed by members of cross-sector social partnerships (CSSPs) is bricolage in action and can be linked to Gray's (1985) facilitating conditions for collaboration. While existing research examines bricolage primarily at the individual level, this research studies collective bricolage, as implemented by a cross-sector social partnership in its process to address a grand challenge.

The authors follow the evolution of a Midwestern initiative aimed at the grand challenge of generational poverty. The deductive case study approach identifies the mechanisms of bricolage being employed in the initiative's evolution and ties these to Gray's (1985) seminal paper on interorganizational collaboration.

This case study has implications for academics conceptually struggling to understand grand challenges and the role of entrepreneurial initiatives in the public and nonprofit sectors, as well as practitioners currently involved in collaborative efforts to address said challenges.

This study enriches the discussion and enhances the link between the CSSP literature and new notions of social entrepreneurship that embrace the collective as their unit of analysis. This is the first work of its kind to link bricolage to a nascent CSSP and demonstrate how the entrepreneurial concept of bricolage is an inherent part of CSSP formation and operation.