Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine US public relations professionals' perceptions of the benefits and challenges associated with the concept of moral entrepreneurship, defined as the purposeful process of changing or creating new institutionalized ethical norms. This study argues that the concept of moral entrepreneurship provides organizations with a potentially valuable framework to actively recognize societal pressures and problems and act accordingly to better the environment in which the organization resides and operates.

This exploratory study uses purposive in-depth interviews with 25 diverse public relations professionals, who represented communication firms, in-house public relations departments, higher education, nonprofits and government.

Respondents assigned a high value to the concept of moral entrepreneurship: In addition to its being viewed as the right thing to do, they recognized its practice as a way to help organizations recruit and retain employee talent and improve stakeholder trust. However, based on the interviews, organizational leadership is the primary initiator of ethical changes; therefore, without a seat at the management table, practitioners lack the influence to initiate such new organizational directions and take on the role of moral entrepreneurs only when directed to do so by their superiors. Barriers to adopting a moral entrepreneurship approach included a limited budget and shortage of staff, employees' resistance to change, fear of failure, poor leadership and a politically polarized workplace.

Practice implications include considerations for furthering moral entrepreneurship in organizations.

This study is the first to explore the applicability of the concept of moral entrepreneurship in public relations. The paper underscores the need for further discussion around novel approaches to ethics in public relations that go beyond simple compliance with professional codes and industry standards and that help organizations lead societal change.

The purpose of this paper is to provide policy and managerial implications required in solving the daunting problem of the existing low-entrepreneurial capital in Uganda.

A large-scale comprehensive survey using a sample of 11,105 small and medium enterprises (SMEs) from 40 high-growth towns was selected and undertaken from five regions of Uganda. The response rate was 40.5 per cent, translating into 4,498 usable questionnaires.

Results reveal that institutional framing, entrepreneurship human capital and entrepreneurial moral values predict entrepreneurship capital in Uganda. These results are presented and discussed in detail in this paper.

The study applied a cross-sectional approach to study behaviour, yet studying behaviour requires time. Therefore, there is need for scholars to undertake a follow up study to test the hypotheses using longitudinal data.

The paper provides implications for the review and development of supporting institutional frames for entrepreneurship, promoting generalized forms of human capital and entrepreneurial ethics moral values.

The motivation for the study is derived from the observation that the legal and regulatory framework in Uganda is biased against SMEs. This is manifested in the high-regulatory burden of registering and running enterprises in Uganda. For example, the cost of registering a business in Uganda is high. Legal proceedings in Uganda are inefficient, complex and costly only favouring firms with resources and connections. This may restrict enterprise development and increase the costs of running businesses, distort human capital and entrepreneurial moral values thereby affecting entrepreneurship capital.

Scholars researching entrepreneurship argue that the distinct characteristics of social entrepreneurs, together with the particular category of opportunities they pursue, invite us to further understand social entrepreneurship (SE) as a distinct field of investigation. The purpose of this paper is to investigate opportunity recognition behaviour of social entrepreneurs and closely related unique attributes of empathy, moral judgement (MRJ) and self-efficacy, in an emerging market African context.

A survey was administered to social entrepreneurs across two of the largest provinces in South Africa, namely Cape Town and Gauteng. Hypotheses were statistically tested using correlational analysis and hierarchical regression with mediation effects.

Results reveal that social entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) plays a significant mediating effect in the relationship between MRJ and social opportunity recognition. Moreover, perceived MRJ and social ESE act as important determinants of increased social opportunity recognition.

This study has brought to attention the relevance of opportunity recognition to social entrepreneurs, while recognising their distinctive features in terms of empathy and MRJ. While self-efficacy and opportunity recognition are relatively well established in the traditional entrepreneurship literature, this study extends the reach of these variables into the SE domain.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the topic and discuss the individual chapters in this volume as well as to provide an intellectual orientation which will hopefully inspire casual readers to read further. The main thesis behind this volume is that entrepreneurial crime and illegal enterprise span two very distinct yet complimentary academic disciplines – namely Criminology and Entrepreneurial/Business Studies. And that we need to take cognisance of both instead of writing and publishing in disciplinary silos.

Our methodological approach in this volume is predominantly qualitative and in addition mainly review based. Our editorial approach is/was one of laissez-faire in that we did not want to stifle authorial creativity or impose order where there was none, or very little. The result is a very eclectic collection of interesting readings which we hope will challenge researchers interested in the topics to cross inter- and intra-disciplinary literature in search of new theoretical models.

Rather than findings we see the contribution of the volume as being an attempt to start conversations between disciplines. We appreciate that this is only a beginning. There are discoveries and perhaps a need to redraw boundaries. One surprising finding was how much the authors all drew on the seminal work of William Baumol to the extent that it has become a common framework for understanding the cross overs.

There are many limitations to the chapters in this volume. The main one is that in any edited volume the editors are faced with a dilemma of allowing more voices to emerge or imposing a restrictive explanatory framework which in turn shoe horns the chapters into an over-arching sense-making architecture. The limitation of this volume is that it can only present a few of the voices and only begin a synthesis. Interested researchers must work hard to draw meaning from the eclectic voices.

The practical implications from this chapter and the edited chapters are manifold. The chapters deal with complex issues and we have opted to allow the authorial voice to be heard and to allow disciplinary writing styles to remain as they are. This allows a very practical understanding of everyday implications to emerge.

There are many policy implications which arise from this introductory chapter and the chapters in this volume but these will take time to manifest themselves. The main point to take away is that to understand and interdict crime and in particular entrepreneurial crime we must draw on inter-disciplinary knowledge and theories of entrepreneurship and business in a wider sense.

This chapter introduces a series of apparently separate yet interconnected chapters which explore the bounds and boundaries of illegal entrepreneurship and its originality lies in its approach.

In business and the culture hospitable to it, not much is more important than the moral status of entrepreneurship. If the entrepreneur is a rascal, a rogue, the system that gives such a person a home is surely tainted. Critics of capitalism such as Robert Kuttner and Earl Shorris have made this point repeatedly in their various prominently published books. They follow the likes of Karl Marx, only unlike Marx they see nothing redeeming about the free market. (Marx thought it was a vital stage of humanity’s development!)

This research paper aims to examine how organized criminals rescript their identities to engage with entrepreneurship discourse when authoring their biographies. From a sociological perspective, stereotypes and social constructs of the entrepreneur and the criminal are subjects of recurring interest. Yet, despite the prevalence of the stereotype of the entrepreneur as a hero-figure in the entrepreneurship literature and the conflation of the entrepreneur with the stereotype of the businessman, notions of entrepreneurial identity are not fixed with constructions of the entrepreneur as a rascal, rogue or villain being accepted as alternative social constructs.

The qualitative approaches of “biographical analysis” and “close reading” adopted help us draw out discursive strategies.

The main finding is that a particular genre of criminal biographies can be re-read as entrepreneur stories. The theme of nuanced entrepreneurial identities and in particular gangster discourse is under researched. In this study, by conducting a close reading of contemporary biographies of British criminals, the paper encounters self-representations of criminals who seek to author an alternative and more appealing social identity as entrepreneurs. That this re-scripting of personal biographies to make gangster stories conform to the genre of entrepreneur stories is of particular interest.

This study points to similarities and differences between criminal and entrepreneurial biographies. It also presents sociological insights into an alternative version of entrepreneurial identity and sociological constructions of the criminal as entrepreneur.

This research provides an insight into how criminals seek to legitimise their life-stories.

This research paper is of value in that it is the first to consider contemporary biographies of British criminals as entrepreneurship discourse. Understanding how criminal biographies and entrepreneur stories share similar socially constructed themes, storylines and epistemologies contribute to the development of entrepreneurship and sociological research by examining entrepreneurship in an unusual social setting.

This study aims to investigate how social entrepreneurial role models influence social entrepreneurial self-efficacy, social entrepreneurial intent and social entrepreneurial action, with moral obligation as a moderator.

A cross-sectional survey of 261 pupils in the South African province of the Eastern Cape was used in the research study. Structural equation modeling was used to test hypotheses.

The research revealed that having social entrepreneurial role models has a positive impact on both social entrepreneurial self-efficacy and social entrepreneurial intent. In addition, a connection was found between social entrepreneurial intent and entrepreneurial action. The influence of moral obligation was found to be a positive and a significant moderator. Moreover, the association between social entrepreneurial role models and social entrepreneurial intent was mediated by social entrepreneurial self-efficacy.

The findings are not generalizable to nonstudent samples because students constituted the sample for gathering data. Future study therefore requires considering nonstudents to generalize the outcomes. This research should be replicated in other South African provinces and other developing countries for comparative outcomes.

Since social entrepreneurial role models have been practically linked to social entrepreneurship intent and entrepreneurial efficacy, understanding the factors that influence student’s decision to start a social enterprise is critical in South Africa to develop targeted interventions aimed at encouraging young people to start new businesses. Policymakers, society and entrepreneurial education will all benefit from the findings.

This study contributes to bridging the knowledge gap as it investigates how social entrepreneurial role models influence social entrepreneurial self-efficacy, social entrepreneurial intent and social entrepreneurial action, with moral obligation as a moderator. Encouraging social entrepreneurship among South African youth would also help address societal issues. This is a pioneering study in the context of an emerging economy such as South Africa, where social entrepreneurship is so integral.

Drawing on the socioemotional selectivity theory and the volunteerism literature, this study aims to examine the influence of empathy, altruism and opportunity recognition, on social entrepreneurial intentions (SEI) of people who have retired from a full-time career. Furthermore, the study examines whether the above-mentioned relationships are mediated by moral obligation.

A set of hypotheses is tested by applying partial least squares structural equation modelling on a survey sample of 227 retirees in Oman, who had participated in an entrepreneurial leadership training after retirement. Using SmartPLS software, the path model is tested through bootstrapping.

The findings suggest that altruism and opportunity recognition do not have a direct relationship with SEI, however, they are significant only when mediated through moral obligation. Nevertheless, empathy has a significant direct association with SEI, and an indirect relationship through moral obligation.

The findings of this study demonstrate that to develop intentions to indulge in social entrepreneurship, among retirees who are approaching their senior years, the focus should be on driving their sense of moral obligation to society. Hence, policymakers and authorities connected to social wellbeing goals can fine-tune their initiatives, such as training, by emphasizing on moral obligation to address social issues through social entrepreneurship.

The novelty of this study is twofold. Firstly, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, it seems to be among the first empirical study that is at the crossroads of the senior entrepreneurship and the social entrepreneurship literature. Secondly, this study fills a gap in the extant literature by deploying the socioemotional selectivity theory to examine the antecedents of SEI of people who have retired from full-time employment in their early to late senior years.