Search results

The Fourth Industrial Revolution has escalated innovation to new heights unseen, creating an evolution of innovation and corporate social responsibility (CSR), and as a result, a more Innovative CSR. With this evolution comes also the evolution of the ‘Preneur’ from social entrepreneur to corporate social entrepreneur and corporate social intrapreneur. It is therefore important to acknowledge that social entrepreneurship is not just for the social sector, or start-up entrepreneur – corporations can also be social entrepreneurs. This chapter establishes an understanding of this possibility alongside solving wicked problems and challenges, and how to provide collaborative networks and co-creation experiences to assist others on this journey. More importantly, the chapter discusses how corporates can assist millennials (and Generation Z) by funding and incubating their innovative or social enterprise idea under the umbrella of CSR strategy, until it is ready to be released to the world. The chapter is supported by academic literature and business publications with suggestions for future research opportunities.

The currently dominant version of the corporate form – the profit-maximizing corporation – is one of the most influential organizational forms in contemporary society. It is also one of the most criticized organizational forms, especially with respect to questions of purpose, participation, and ownership. The corporation’s strong focus on profit maximization and its non-democratic nature, as it excludes non-shareholding stakeholders from participating in how the corporation is run, have all attracted significant criticism. There are, however, several debates over alternative ways of organizing besides the corporation. In this chapter, we review the most influential of these: co-operatives, state-owned enterprises, democratically organized firms, social enterprises, stakeholder firms, and firms based on the sharing economy business model. We first analyze how these alternative ways of organizing do things differently with respect to questions of purpose, participation, and ownership and then we discuss how these different approaches can inspire efforts to reform the corporation.

Connecting and integrating the economics, organization, and management of the firm with other relevant perspectives in political science, constitutional law, and constitutional political economy, this paper revisits the nature of the corporation as a particular type of constitutional contract. The baseline argument is to show how far we can go in redesigning and democratizing the corporate form of business “societas” by using only organizational effectiveness criteria before any ethical or political options. In fact, on the basis of those (re-)foundations, the analysis addresses the questions of why the form of government of that societas should be (and in part already is in various corporate law systems) a “republic of rightholders”; who those “rightholders” should be; and which structures (organs and bodies) and decision and control procedures may sustain effective governance not only in terms of the representation of legitimate interests but also in terms of decision quality. The result is the specification of the requisite variety of “chambers” and within “chambers.”

Social enterprises are increasingly recognized as a new form of organization (combining social and business goals) providing innovative and scalable solutions to widespread and complex socioenvironmental problems. Yet, they often struggle to keep themselves afloat due to the difficulty in accessing required resources. Networking approaches provide social enterprises with cost-effective ways to fulfill these resource requirements. Such approaches, although useful, give rise to dilemmas while building ties with both financial and non-financial actors. Although much research has been conducted on social enterprise networking or partnerships, little is known about how social enterprises address such dilemmas. This chapter explores how do social entrepreneurs address moral dilemmas while networking with key stakeholders? To answer this question, we analyze the existing literature to understand the networking strategies adopted and the moral dilemmas experienced by the social entrepreneurs. Based on our review of literature, we present four kinds of social enterprises in terms of their networking situations and choices: (1) secluded saints (less known and less connected; high on moral values); (2) secluded devils (less known and less connected; low on moral values); (3) saints waving at the devils (well known and well connected; low on moral values); (4) saints in the pack of devils (well known and well connected; high on moral values). These categories are used to explain how social enterprises with different values, interact with and use their networks for different purposes. We discuss the possible consequences of each strategy and keep the question, how to reach the state of “successful saints,” open for future research. By presenting these different networking situations, our matrix sheds new lights on different social entrepreneurial networking options and their possible outcomes. This can act as a guide and a cautionary note, not only for the social enterprises but also for any hybrid organizations dealing with conflicting networking choices.

In the mid-1970s, China's economy had only two forms of public ownership: state ownership and collective ownership. In the agricultural sector, virtually all production was organized into collectively owned Production Brigades (villages) and People's Communes (townships or groups). In industry, SOEs accounted for 80% of total industrial output, with the remaining 20% shared by urban and rural collectives. By the late 1990s, SOEs and collectives accounted for less than 50% of GDP (International Finance Corporation, 2000; p. 18). Transformation of the ownership of production has undoubtedly been one of the key components of China's successful reform program. This has been achieved through combined efforts: privatization of agricultural production on collectively owned land; new entry of collectively owned industrial enterprises, especially township and village enterprises (TVEs), and their subsequent privatization; new entry of foreign-invested and domestic private enterprises; and ownership transformation of existing SOEs (Mako & Zhang, 2003).

This chapter analyzes and discusses the empirical results of the study. The discussion is organized under the following themes: independent director, audit committee, auditor independence, corporate code of conduct, adoption of IFRS, and measures for improvement. Three main findings emerge from the analysis. First, the current institutional environment does not yet fully support the Anglo-American practices. Second, in recent years the quality of financial reporting has improved considerably, which is largely attributable to strengthened accounting rules and regulations. However, the imported Anglo-American models of corporate governance and financial reporting, except for enhancing auditor independence, have had only a minor impact on financial reporting quality. Third, although the imported practices are not working as intended, the vast majority of interviewees stated that it was appropriate to move toward internationally acceptable principles and standards. Improving laws and regulations seems to be the main measure for rendering the institutional environment in China more supportive of Anglo-American models of corporate governance and financial reporting.

Forces of globalization have driven international convergence in corporate governance and accounting considerably over the past few decades. Nevertheless, despite the global trend, convergence of corporate governance and financial reporting remains a subject of debate. This research monograph critically examines whether China’s convergence with Anglo-American corporate governance principles and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) is likely to produce the expected outcomes of improving the transparency and comparability of accounting information in Chinese firms. In this chapter, we discuss the motivation for and the significance of the study; describe the issues associated with the adoption of internationally acceptable standards and principles in China; explain the theoretical framework used to inform the study and research methodology; and present the aim and objectives of the monograph.