Search results

The data used to present this case was collected from secondary data sources. These sources included media reports associated with Michael Jordan and his trajectory since entering the sport, as well as specific information published about his time at the Chicago Bulls. Another key source of information is the ESPN documentary conducted specifically on Jordan’s relationship with his National Basketball Association (NBA) team.

The case follows the story of Michael Jordan, who took his team, the Chicago Bulls, to fame in a rather controversial manner. To do so, Michael Jordan had to alter his leadership style over the years to be respected as a leader and motivate his team to win one NBA championship after another. On 20th April 2020, ESPN’s “The Last Dance”, a 10-part documentary about Michael Jordan and his time playing for the Chicago Bulls was released to much acclaim. The documentary became highly noted as Jordan himself, both directed and starred in the documentary. Jordan’s great achievements stood out, but so did the conflicts that the basketball star had with The Bulls’ management team and mainly, his teammates. Relationships between teammates were far from harmonious, which led to questions around whether Michael Jordan was as good a leader, as he was a star player. Cultural change within the organisation was primarily linked to the often-contested leadership of Jordan.

The case can be used at UG, MSc and MBA levels. It works for in-person teaching and for online teaching. It is most suitable in leadership, strategy and strategy in practice courses. However, it is critical to note that the case can shed light on the dynamics that leaders and teammates have within their teams. Therefore, this case may be valuable to students studying courses where they themselves must work in groups and oftentimes encounter challenges in managing their team. These challenges can arise at all levels of experience. As such, the case provides particularly useful reflection for decision makers who may be beginning to develop their leadership skill (UG), those who have already experienced working in teams (MSc) or leading teams themselves (MBA, Executive MBA). The case addresses the challenges associated with achieving high team motivation and performance. It also sheds light on the challenges associated with leading a cultural change within a team and the approaches of different actors involved. It may be best to introduce the case in the context of a (1.5–2 h) workshop once students understand the basic frameworks and tools used to analyse leadership styles and their characteristics.

This paper aims to re-evaluate social enterprise (SE) history to pinpoint a pluralist turn in communitarian philosophy during the 1970s, which has the potential to transform labour and consumer rights in enterprise development.

Through a close examination of model rules created by founders of the FairShares Association (FSA), the authors find that the communitarian origins of SE are disturbingly obscured and hidden.

In studying FSA documents and building a timeline of the development of the FairShares Model (FSM), the authors found links between SE developments in the UK, continental Europe, Asia, North/South America and the development of solidarity cooperatives.

The authors argue that the discovery of a communitarian pluralist turn advances “new cooperativism” by enfranchising both labour and users in industrial relations (IR). Using this insight, they challenge accounts of SE history and argue for more research on SE’s potential contribution to radical IR.

The paper highlights the potential of the FSM as a vehicle for catalysing new SE and IR practices that share wealth and power more equitably between social entrepreneurs, workforce members, service/product users and community/social investors.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue, which explores the concept and significance of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship internationally.

This introductory article examines the literature that exists to date and presents an outline of some of the fundamental issues and the challenging tensions within the conceptualisation of social enterprise. The article concludes with a discussion of critical future research needs.

The findings suggest that a critical perspective is required in order to add originality and value to this developing area of research.

The papers presented raise some interesting issues about current conceptualisations of social enterprise and entrepreneurship, challenging tensions from critical, theoretical and empirical perspectives. The Special Issue seeks to expand the debate in social enterprise and bring to the fore some critical perspective in order to highlight alternative views which are often in conflict with the wave of euphoria and optimism that is driving current theoretical development in the field of social enterprise and entrepreneurship.

This paper seeks to examine the discourses that influence policy and practice in social enterprises. In institutional circles, arguments are shaped by the desire to protect assets for the community, while entrepreneurial discourses favour a mixture of investment sources, surplus sharing and inclusive systems of governance. A critique is outlined that challenges policy‐makers and academics to move beyond the heated debate on “business‐like” activity through a deeper understanding of the social relations entered into (and created by) different social entrepreneurial activities.

The paper is wholly theoretical. First, contradictions are exposed through a review of practitioner and scholarly literature. Thereafter, empirically grounded studies are used to develop a theoretical model that accommodates and accounts for diverse practices.

A broader perspective, that views human behaviour as a product of, and support system for, our socio‐sexual choices, is deployed to extend understanding of social capital. By integrating this into governance theory, workplaces come to be seen as complex centres of community‐building, replete with economic and social goals. The concept of “social rationality” is elaborated as an alternative way to understand the legitimacy of social entrepreneurial activity and management practice.

The paper concludes by developing a framework and typology that theorises social enterprise as a heterogeneous business movement. Each form of social enterprise integrates socially rational thinking into its policies and practices. This suggests a different educational agenda for social entrepreneurs oriented towards the equitable distribution, and not accumulation, of social and economic capital.

To investigate the higher‐level skills needs and learning provisions for small medium social enterprises (SMSEs) in Northwest England in order to support strategies for lifelong learning and organizational development.

The study involved the development of “Balance”, a tool based on an adapted form of Kaplan and Norton’s Balanced Scorecard (1996) performance measurement and management tool, integrating the notion of incremental learning development, and utilizing Kolb and Fry’s (1975) organizational learning cycle. Discusses the findings of piloting the tool in 30 social enterprises to make a case for an alternative approach to business analysis, where a qualitative approach is put forward.

The results indicated that the Balance tool provided SMSEs with an easy to use diagnostic tool for collating managers’ subjective opinions in order to simplify the analysis process and provide a reference point for discussing management skills needs. Reveals that there is a spectrum of social enterprise with the “need” or “social” driven organization at one end and the more “enterprise” driven organization at the other. Concludes that the “social” led business tends to focus on an informal, organic organizational system, utilising a loose business framework purely as a means to meeting the social/environment need, while the “enterprise” led business focuses on a structured business organizational system, embracing business logic and businesslike methods and discourse to meet the social/environment/business need.

Builds on research which was published in the previous issue of this journal (“Business practices in social enterprises”, Social Enterprise Journal, Volume 2 Number 1 2006) and outlines the current understandings and shortcomings of SMSE management knowledge.

The purpose of this case study is to highlight the complexities involved in conducting a social return on investment (SROI) forecast in a small social enterprise, The Wooden Canal Boat Society.

This SROI forecast was a collaborative exercise between Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council and the Wooden Canal Boat Society. A case study methodology has been adopted in order to allow the voice of the first author, from the Local Authority, to come through.

The findings highlight that the process of scoping; gathering and analysing information; engaging with stakeholders and assigning evidence against proxies (London centric) is challenging and exhausting, yet it provides a rich learning experience for all those involved. The accuracy of the ratio is compromised and implicated by the time and resources that are available to invest the subjectivity of the data behind the ratio the judgements and decisions over who and how to include/exclude individuals from the SROI forecast. In short, the Wooden Canal Boat Society SROI forecast proved to be the tipping point in a successful grant application. However, SROI is not something the Local Authority are set to embrace more widely or would particularly recommend for the vast majority of their local social economy organisations.

As a case study paper, the authors do not seek to generalise. The case provides the reader with a stakeholder informed account of the experiences of being involved in a forecast SROI from the perspective of the first author from the Local Authority. In times of political change and economic austerity the climate in the UK social economy has significantly altered, particularly in the marketisation of services and funding provisions for health and social care. One implication of this shift that is reflected in the paper is Local Authority thinking in light of the Social Value Act, which passed through the UK Parliament in 2012.

The value of this case study provides academics and practitioners with an alternative perspective and rich commentary of the first author's narrative and reflections on the process of SROI and the dynamics involved in arriving at the ratio.