Search results

This paper aims to examine the geographic distribution of social enterprises at the local sub-district level in one Indian state.

This paper adopts a multimethod approach. The exploratory phase involved interviews and analysis of social enterprise distribution at the national level. Phase 2 involved mapping the distribution of social enterprises at the sub-district level in one state. Distribution around established social enterprises was plotted using latitude–longitude positions. Grounded theory approach to analysing qualitative data was adopted to identify the mechanism for agglomeration.

Social entrepreneurship sees the entrepreneurial problems as solving universalized social problems abstracting them out of the geo-historical and political economic context of the social problem. This study shows that solving a social problem is itself implicated in a social–historical organizational context of aid giving within developing countries. Networks of resources that early enterprises enable draw newer organizations toward them and lead to the formation of clusters. While such clusters might improve chances of enterprise survival, the phenomenon inadvertently leads to a new kind of inequity, as areas with fewer social enterprises lack the organizational infrastructure necessary for delivery of welfare.

Research in social enterprises needs to pay more attention to the context of the enterprises or society in addition to its current focus on universal social problems. Social enterprises themselves could be new sources of inequity in terms of the organizational infrastructure they represent.

Policymakers need to make directed efforts that respond not only to social problems but also to the socio-historic-organizational contexts where the problems are being solved and seeding the entrepreneurial effort in those spaces.

This paper draws upon prior research that built a theoretical framework for the emergence of social enterprise ecosystems based upon the biological evolutionary theory. This paper aims to extend this previous research by practically applying the said theory to the development of stakeholder and institutional networks across Europe.

Data from in-depth semi-structured interviews and focus groups were analysed using Constant Comparison Method. Data were generated from discussions with 258 key stakeholders in ten countries across Europe, exploring the historical, political, social, legal and economic factors that influence the patterns of a social enterprise seen in each country.

The results identify the emergence of four social enterprise ecosystem types (Statist-macro, Statist-micro, Private-macro and Private-micro). These are used to explain the differences found in each of the ten country’s social enterprise ecosystems. The results are discussed in relation to the evolutionary theory in social entrepreneurship and how “genetic” and “epigenetic” factors lead to the divergence of social enterprise ecosystems, and the impact that this has on the stakeholders and institutions that are present within them.

A typology of ecosystems is presented, which can be used by policymakers across Europe to understand how best to support their local social economies.

By the end of their studies, students are expected to: undergraduate level. Learning objective 1: Describe the concept of social entrepreneurship. Learning objective 2: Explain the sources and challenges of funding social entrepreneurial activities. Learning objective 3: Discuss the different strategies that social entrepreneurs may use to raise funds. Postgraduate level. Learning Objective 1: Use theory to explain the concept of social entrepreneurship. Learning objective 2: Discuss the role of social capital in facilitating resource acquisition for social entrepreneurial activities. Learning objective 3: Evaluate the current action for fundamental change and development (AFFCAD) funding model and propose strategies that may be used by a social enterprise to achieve financial sustainability when donor funding expires.

The past decade has seen the emergence of many social enterprises from disadvantaged communities in low-income countries, seeking to provide solutions to social problems, which in developed countries would normally be addressed by government sponsored welfare programmes. The social entrepreneurs behind such initiatives are typically drawn from the disadvantaged communities they serve. They are often young people committed to improving the lives of their most disadvantaged community members. Being poor themselves and located in the poorest communities, establishing their enterprise faces fundamental challenges of obtaining resources and if accessed, sustaining the flow of resources to continue and grow their enterprise. Targeting external donors and mobilizing social resources within their community is a typical route to get their enterprise off the ground, but sustaining momentum when donor funding ceases requires changes of strategy and management. How are young social entrepreneurs dealing with these challenges? The case focusses on AFFCAD, a social enterprise founded by Mohammed Kisirisa and his three friends to support poor people in Bwaise, the largest slum in Kampala city. It illustrates how, like many other similar social enterprise teams, the AFFCAD team struggled to establish itself and its continuing difficulties in trying to financially sustain its activities. The case demonstrates how the youngsters mobilised social networks and collective action to gain access to donor funding and how they are modifying this strategy as donor funding expires. From an academic perspective, a positive theory of social entrepreneurship (Santos, 2012) is applied to create an understanding of the concept of social entrepreneurship. The case uses the social capital theory to demonstrate the role played by social ties in enabling social entrepreneurs to access financial and non-financial support in a resource scarce context (Bourdieu, 1983; Coleman, 1988, 1990). The National Council for Voluntary Organisations Income Spectrum is used as a tool to develop the options available for the AFFCAD team to sustain their activities in the absence of donor support. The case provides evidence that social entrepreneurs are not limited by an initial lack of resources especially if they create productive relationships at multiple levels in the communities where they work. However, their continued success depends on the ability to reinvent themselves by identifying ways to generate revenue to achieve their social goals.

This case study is aimed at Bachelor of Entrepreneurship students, MBA, MSc. Entrepreneurship and Masters of Social Innovation students.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS 3: Entrepreneurship.

The overall objective of this research was to elucidate the ecosystem of women’s health social enterprises (WHSEs) based in the United States. The Aim I was to conduct a secondary data analysis of a random national sample of non-profit WHSEs based in the United States regarding their characteristics and areas of intervention. Aim II was to conduct a qualitative assessment of a sample of WHSEs based in the United States regarding their perspectives on the ecosystem of WHSEs. Aim I utilized the GuideStar database and assessed enterprise size, geographic location, financial distress, health intervention area, and health activity category using descriptive statistics, statistical tests, and multivariable regression analysis via SPSS. Aim II utilized in-depth interviewing and grounded theory analysis via MAXQDA 2018 to identify novel themes and core categories while using an established framework for mapping social enterprise ecosystems as a scaffold.

Aim I findings suggest that WHSE activity is more predominant in the south region of the United States but not geographically concentrated around cities previously identified as social enterprise hubs. WHSEs take a comprehensive approach to women’s health, often simultaneously focusing on multiple areas of health interventions. Although most WHSEs demonstrate a risk for financial distress, very few exhibited severe risk. Risk for financial distress was not significantly associated with any of the measured enterprise characteristics. Aim II generated four core categories of findings that describe the ecosystem of WHSE: (1) comprehensive, community-based, and culturally adaptive care; (2) interdependent innovation in systems, finances, and communication; (3) interdisciplinary, cross-enterprise collaboration; and (4) women’s health as the foundation for family and population health. These findings are consistent with the three-failures theory for non-profit organizations, particularly that WHSEs address government failure by focusing on the unmet women’s health needs of the underserved populations (in contrast to the supply of services supported by the median voter) and address the market failure of over exclusion through strategies such as cross-subsidization and price discrimination. While WHSEs operate with levels of financial risk and are subject to the voluntary sector failure of philanthropic insufficiency, the data also show that they act to remediate other threats of voluntary failure.

Aim I findings highlight the importance of understanding financial performance of WHSEs. Also, lack of significant associations between our assessed enterprise characteristics and their financial risk suggests need for additional research to identify factors that influence financial performance of WHSE. Aim II findings show that WHSEs are currently engaged in complex care coordination and comprehensive biopsychosocial care for women and their families, suggesting that these enterprises may serve as a model for improving women’s health and health care. The community-oriented and interdisciplinary nature of WHSE as highlighted by our study may also serve as a unique approach for research and education purposes. Additional research on the ecosystem of WHSE is needed in order to better inform generalizability of our findings and to elucidate how WHSE interventions may be integrated into policies and practices to improve women’s health.

The aim of this paper is to provide insights and knowledge about the motivations and implications for social enterprises' participation in SIBs, particularly in terms of collaboration and partnership with the public sector, as well as the different positions on this issue. The overall aim, therefore, is to show how social enterprises and public organisations have interacted in the context of SIBs and what has been achieved by participating.

This multiple case study approach applies qualitative methods like observations and semi-structured and unstructured interviews.

The study shows that SIBs can be an option for financing social enterprises within a strategy of income diversification and resource dependency. Despite tensions and complexities, SIBs can renew the traditional funding relationship by adding innovation, strengthening the co-creation process and creating a stable relationship.

Research findings may lack generalisability due to the specific context in which the case study is rooted.

The paper offers practical implications in terms of insights and suggestions for social enterprises and the public sector interested in developing the scheme.

This paper adds the voice and perspective of social enterprises on the relationship with the public sector within the framework of SIBs initiatives.

This paper aims to examine the extent to which urban social enterprises (SEs) have diversified their funding sources and shifted towards loans and development finance in recent years. The paper seeks to consider the underlying reasons for a limited demand for loans by comparing two theoretical perspectives on SE development. The concept of “social bricolage” implies SEs do not seek conventional business loans or equity finance, because they survive in resource poor environments by improvising and re‐using redundant capital. A second evolutionary approach implies that SE financing will be dominated by a reliance on habits and practices learnt from the contexts in which social entrepreneurs have operated.

The paper is based on analysis of interviews with 40 SEs in four English cities.

The paper finds a limited degree of change and scant evidence of local decentralisation in social enterprises' financial contexts. It argues that both conceptual approaches offer important insights into the causes of the low level of demand for development finance by emphasising the importance of practical and improvised financial management. This is an adaptive response to uncertainty but is also a manifestation of SEs' inherited capabilities in public and charitable finance.

The research is based on a relatively small sample of social enterprises in central and deprived urban areas. The financial practices of social enterprises in other types of environment also require examination.

It is unrealistic to expect the majority of SEs to secure conventional loan finance, instead they require “softer” finance and intensive support from intermediaries.

The paper makes a novel empirical contribution by revealing social enterprises' views and recent experiences with funding. Its approach allows an intensive examination of key financial issues. It makes an original theoretical contribution by seeking to apply, develop, and evaluate two theoretical perspectives on the form and practices of social enterprises.

Small social enterprises (SEs) face many challenges as they seek to secure their survival, sustainability and performance, but little is known about the interrelations among these challenges and how these SEs might mitigate their challenges by using online platforms.

Drawing on the results of 19 in-depth semi-structured interviews with founders of small SEs in Australia, the authors present two integrative frameworks: one demonstrates how different challenges directly or indirectly influence SE performance, and the other represents the linkage between online platforms use and SE performance.

The authors’ findings indicate that SEs face social, economic and organizational challenges, and that SEs use online platforms to mitigate these challenges and improve their performance. Online platforms enable these enterprises to identify funding opportunities, recruit staff and volunteers, connect with other SEs, form partnerships, promote their organization, market their products and services, and avoid competition and duplication in their ecosystem.

The authors provide a guiding model for further research on using online platforms to mitigate challenges for small enterprises to improve performance. This study advances current understanding of why some SEs fail to thrive, while others survive, flourish and grow.

The authors’ study advances the resource-based view by identifying how online platforms offer a valuable resource to improve SE performance, and assist managers to maintain the strategic direction of their enterprise.

In this chapter, I attempt to explain the diverse nature of social enterprise education in higher education and review the content, placement, and pedagogy of various programs of study with distinctly different approaches. I see the approaches to social enterprise education falling into three different categories that I call accommodating, integrating, and immersion. The differences are explained by the problem of the familiar: the attempt to define the field in terms of the existing economic and entrepreneurial theories alone. Building on work of others I offer a new framework for understanding social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in the form of propositions that may be empirically tested and potentially could be helpful in developing consistent models for social enterprise education. These propositions are concerned with social benefits or outcomes, agency and firm, scale, and sustainable funding.

This case aims to introduce students to the social sector financing (internal and external) landscape, and its nuances. It specifically provides material to enable critical evaluation and decision-making around financing a for-profit social enterprise and its associated challenges.

The case highlights the fundraising options available to a social enterprise in an emerging economy like India. EnglishHelper Technologies Private Ltd. (EH) commenced operations in 2011 as a subsidiary of its parent Boston-based company, to provide technology-based learning solutions primarily to the underserved segments of the country’s population. Sanjay Gupta, co-founder and CEO, EH Inc., wanted to explore funding options suitable for the company’s next growth stage. The existing funding sources of equity from its parent company, grants and revenues (mainly from product sales to government schools) had worked well for EH in the initial years of its growth. But its financial performance was being impacted, and, additionally, further scaling up would require sources that could give a much larger quantum of funds and add support to EH’s operations. EH would also need to revisit its revenue model to strengthen its financial sustainability, by drawing lessons from the other prevalent ones in the ed-tech sector and make it more effective. The case encourages students to assess the various funding alternatives, internal and external, for a social sector private company with a for-profit model like EH, to enable it to achieve its scaling-up plans while serving its social mission.

The case is relevant for both undergraduate and postgraduate students and can be used in business administration programs.

CSS 1: Accounting and finance.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

This paper aims to investigate the organisational development of three small‐ and medium‐sized social enterprises (SMSEs). The objectives of the paper are to highlight the critical stages of development that have led to change, growth and success for these enterprises. Although social purpose organisations have existed for some time, recent political interest in the subject has created a new and emerging field of interest where little empirical research exists. This paper examines how SMSEs evolve, utilizing the framework of organisational life cycle (OLC) models, specifically Adizes's model. Thus, drawing on the OLC field of study this paper will make a significant contribution to a deeper understanding of social enterprise development.

A qualitative methodological approach was undertaken in order to understand the stories and experiences. A semi‐structured approach enabled the researcher to gain deep insights into the life cycle stages that changed and developed each of these organisations over time – which would not have been as insightful through a quantitative methodological approach.

The key findings indicate that a host of internal and external incidents were critical to the development of these firms. The entrepreneurialism shown within these organisations was crucial. These three firms all grew from community‐based campaigns that were able to exploit financial opportunities and grow with a momentum over a number of years. The organisation structures, although different across the three cases, were critical factors in the ability to deliver, develop skills and handle growth. Through analysing these cases through the framework of the OLC model we found that the development stages were similar and that the model is a useful lens for viewing social enterprise organisation development.

Empirical evidence of this nature is currently lacking from the SMSE community. This research therefore contributes to the knowledge capital on this sector and is important for practitioners, business support agencies and academics in understanding the organisational development of social enterprises.