Search results

The purpose of this paper is to perform a critical analysis of the relationship between small- and medium-sized social enterprises (SMSEs) and banks. Based on the conceptual framework for the analysis of SME’s credit availability developed by Berger and Udell (2006), this study aims to contribute to the current debate in two ways: first, outlining the characteristics of the lending technologies currently used by banks and financial institutions to evaluate SMSEs when they apply for credit; and second, discussing, based on the results of the empirical analysis, the coherence of these systems from the social ecosystem perspective and identifying areas for possible improvement.

The paper develops a conceptual framework based on the model proposed by Berger and Udell (2006), which defines the characteristics of lending technologies that banks use to evaluate SMEs, and applies it to the case of SMSEs. To study the interplay of these lending technologies, the empirical analysis is based on a case study of five Italian banks. Data are collected from multiple sources to capture key dimensions of the problems analyzed.

The paper provides empirical insight about the relationship between SMSEs and banks. The Italian case shows that the current lending infrastructure must be revised to support SMSE credit availability, and government policies affect the national financial institution structure. The relationship between SMSEs and Italian banks remains underdeveloped.

The research supports the scaling up of social business.

This paper fulfills an identified need to study how social enterprises credit access can be enabled.

This paper aims to explore an adaptation of the National Science Foundation Innovation Corps (I-Corps^TM) program, which uses the Lean Startup methodology to help STEM scientists commercialize their research. The adaptation, known as I-Corps for Social Impact (I-Corps SI), extends the for-profit canonical model to include mixed revenue and non-profit business models, to help researchers generate social impact.

A research team of policy and non-profit experts observed and adapted a canonical I-Corps process, then interviewed academics who are scaling and sustaining socially impactful solutions from their research, including past I-Corps participants, to validate research team learning.

The paper describes limitations of the I-Corps model and modifications required to enhance social impact.

While the field of social entrepreneurship has grown rapidly over the past few decades, social scientists have lagged behind in translating evidence-based research into solutions that can be scaled and sustained to achieve social impact. The paper presents an evidence-based case for a pedagogical tool to close this gap.

A focus on validated learning and business model development supports a paradigm shift within the social sciences, which can help spur greater social innovation from evidence-based research.

The purpose of the paper is to propose a systems change lens to current approaches to assessing social impact in social ventures. Many existing tools for measuring social impact are limited in their capacity to assess the inherent complexities and interconnected nature of the work done by social enterprises.

The paper uses in-depth interviews with sector experts to gain insights into their needs related to impact assessment, as well as issues they face when attempting to understand and measure their impact.

Expert interviews provide insights into how social impact occurs through interconnected systems. It also highlights the need for impact assessment to better consider interaction within systems and networks. Results support previous work concerning the need for methods that can better account for complexity, interacting problems and the place of power in influencing actions.

Following results from interviews and review of existing literature, symbolic interactionism and Social Worlds/Arenas theories are used to gain insight as to how impact can be conceptualized in terms of systemic shifts in social equilibria. The model proposes to capture the contested definitions of problems and their negotiation in social structures.

Grounded in sociological theory, the model brings a new theoretical approach to social impact assessment, one that provides a different view of social structures than existing models that are grounded in economic metrics. The proposed model, therefore, provides a new lens for the detailed assessment of the complex interactions between systems.

In spite of the availability of metrics for measuring social impact (SI), it can be difficult for organisations to select tools that fit their precise needs. To address this challenge, this study conducts a systematic literature review by using legitimacy theory as a point of departure. It examines tools that capture three dimensions of sustainability – social, economic and environmental (SEE) – and firm size.

Top four journal databases in the social sciences from the FT50 review were searched to identify articles published in peer-reviewed journals in the 2009-2019 period, using keywords to conceptualise the construct. For comprehensive assessment, this study adopted a method that requires the logic synthesis of concepts and evidence emerging from the literature to address the research aim.

The results show that most of the articles developed tools or frameworks to measure SI based on the triple bottom line of sustainability – SEE – and firm size. However, there is insufficient evidence of their integration into practice.

This work contributes to the legitimisation of social enterprises (SEs) by using validated tools and frameworks to develop practical suggestions for SI measurement (SIM).

As legitimacy is an important rationale for SIM, this study adds value through the development of a suitability framework. The framework enables SEs to identify the most appropriate tool for their purpose and size to establish legitimacy through impact measurement and reporting.