Search results

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.

The purpose of this study is twofold: (1) to examine the relationship between comprehensive social competence, entrepreneurial tenacity and social entrepreneurial action and (2) to test the mediating role of entrepreneurial tenacity in the relationship between comprehensive social competence and social entrepreneurial action among social ventures in Uganda.

The study is cross-sectional and quantitative. Data were analyzed with the help of Statistical Package for Social Sciences and analysis of moment structures.

Results show that both comprehensive social competence and entrepreneurial tenacity are significantly associated with social entrepreneurial action. Results further indicate that entrepreneurial tenacity partially mediates the relationship between comprehensive social competence and social entrepreneurial action.

To the authors' knowledge, this study provides initial empirical evidence on the relationship between comprehensive social competence, entrepreneurial tenacity and social entrepreneurial action using evidence from a developing African country – Uganda. Mostly, this provides an initial evidence of the mediating role of entrepreneurial tenacity on the relationship between comprehensive social competence and social entrepreneurial action.

The purpose of this study is two-fold: to examine the relationship between conditional resources, social entrepreneurial intent and social entrepreneurial action and to test the mediating role of social entrepreneurial intent in the relationship between conditional resources and social entrepreneurial action among social ventures in Uganda.

The study adopts a quantitative methodological approach were hypotheses were statistically tested using structural equation modelling based on survey data (n = 243) from community-based organization owner-managers in Uganda.

Results show that both conditional resources and social entrepreneurial intent are significantly associated with social entrepreneurial action. Results further indicate that social entrepreneurial intent partially mediates the relationship between conditional resources and social entrepreneurial action.

To the authors’ knowledge, this study provides a shred of initial empirical evidence on the relationship between conditional resources, social entrepreneurial intent and social entrepreneurial action using evidence from a developing African country – Uganda. Mostly, this study provides initial evidence of the mediating role of social entrepreneurial intent in the relationship between conditional resources and social entrepreneurial action.

Mainstream entrepreneurship research tends to adopt either the causation or effectuation perspective in their studies. Yet, the social enterprise literature has largely focussed on the bricolage perspective to explain social entrepreneurial action. The authors argue that when investigating legitimacy driven opportunity pursuit of an enterprise’s pre-emergence stage, all three perspectives of causation, effectuation and bricolage are required. The purpose of this paper was to address the research question how does effectuation determine entrepreneurial action in the pre-emergence of a social enterprise?

An in-depth single case study approach was used based on the data provided by the founding entrepreneur of Good-Faith Learning social enterprise in Australia.

The results demonstrated the complementary evolution of the three perspectives. In the following sequence, the effectuation, causation and bricolage actions were identified during the pre-emergence stage of the Good-Faith Learning social enterprise. Specifically, the input–process–output perspective of the study confirmed that the initial stage reflects on the effectual means linked to the causation-based strong articulation of the social vision and mission. The process stage dominates the bricolage approach to resourcing leading to effectual outcomes subsequently. Further, the specific actions of the pre-emergence stage are comprised legitimacy driven symbolic management approaches conveying the entrepreneur’s credibility and commitment, professional organising through website, gut-instinct based team selection, and organisational achievement.

The future research may conduct multiple case study analysis with multiple respondents to observe the consistency or deviations of the patterns identified in this study.

This single case study demonstrates the complementary existence of causation, effectuation and bricolage elements in entrepreneurial actions in a single social enterprise context and advances the social entrepreneurship literature.

This paper aims to introduce the concept of Entrepreneurial Collective Intelligence (ECI) as a means of understanding how communities of entrepreneurial actors learn to act both collectively and knowingly. It explores how connections between processes of CI, agency and action can explain and enable the development entrepreneurial community organisations.

There is a selective literature review of prior works on the related fields of community and collective entrepreneurship; collectives and intelligence; agency and action. The review is used to propose a framework of collective entrepreneurial intelligence, agency and action. An interpretive approach is used to research four case studies of community organisations which use CI to generate entrepreneurial outcomes.

The cases are compared with themes from prior literature to develop a conceptual model of four ECI processes which enable intelligence, agency and action: collaborative processes; distributed working; intelligence representations and organisation of infrastructures. These are theorised to discuss ideas, challenges, methods and questions to enhance entrepreneurial actions, based on sharing knowledge and learning, in the context of collective agency, action and intelligence.

The four processes, both together and separately, represent a coherent framework useful for further studies on the role of collectives in enterprising communities.

The four processes each represent a central area of attention, not only for development, learning, decision-making and leadership within enterprising communities but also for entrepreneurship education in terms of alternative didactics, pedagogies and learning forms.

The improved knowledge on the role of collective agency and CI within entrepreneurial processes is useful for strengthening civil activism and other fruitful forms of entrepreneurial collective processes. This may help solve complicated societal problems where traditional conceptions of entrepreneurship fail.

The conceptual contribution is to explain the dynamic relationships between ECI and action, mediated by collective agency. The role of CI in informing entrepreneurial communities is explored and four enabling processes are proposed. This coherent framework is useful for further studies on the role of collectives in enterprising communities, whilst informing their learning, decision-making and leadership.

Social entrepreneurs engage in action because social entrepreneurs want to solve social problems. Consequently, to see more social entrepreneurship in contexts with the most severe social problems is expected. This paper argues that this is an oversimplification of the problem-action nexus in social entrepreneurship and that action does not necessarily correspond to the observed scale of social problems. Drawing on the theoretical framing of crescive conditions, this relationship is affected by forms of public investment as institutions that distinctively promote engagement and public interest amongst social entrepreneurs. Thus, this paper assesses the relationship between varying levels of social problems and social entrepreneurship action (SEA) and how and to what extent public investment types – as more and less locally anchored crescive conditions – affect this relationship.

The hypotheses are tested with a series of random-effects regression models. The data stem from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor's (GEM) 2015 social entrepreneurship survey and Chile's 2015 National Socioeconomic Characterisation Survey (CASEN). The authors combined both data sets and cross-matched individual-level data (action and investment) with commune-level data (social problem scale) resulting in unique contextualised observations for 1,124 social entrepreneurs.

Contrary to current understanding, this study finds that SEA is positively associated with low-social problem scale. This means that high levels of deprivation do not immediately lead to action. The study also finds that locally anchored forms of investment positively moderate this relationship, stimulating action in the most deprived contexts. On the contrary, centralised public investment leads to increased social entrepreneurial action in wealthier communities where it is arguably less needed.

The findings contribute to the literature on SEA in deprived contexts, social and public investment as well as policy-level discussion and broader issues of entrepreneurship and social problems.

The purpose of this exploratory study is to examine entrepreneurial deviance from the perspective of New Zealand's commercial honey producers. The study adopts entrepreneurial action and social learning theories and proposes a theoretical framework in the context of entrepreneurial deviance.

Data were collected through online surveys from 52 professional beekeepers.

Overstocking of beehives, encroachment, biosecurity threats and unfair competition were most common forms of deviance affecting participants. While these predominantly responded through investing in disease prevention, security equipment or by reporting deviant incidents, finding proper solutions remains elusive. The findings revealed robust alignments with both theories. Overall, offenders’ perceived incentives to act illustrate alignment with social learning theory’s four key constructs. Entrepreneurial action emerged through individual perpetrators’ evaluation and subsequent maximisation of potentially lucrative opportunities.

The study addresses an important and under-researched dimension, notably, the negative or “dark” side of entrepreneurs, in this case, illustrated through greed and disregard for fair and proper ways of conducting business. This knowledge gap is even more obvious among small and medium business, which is also the focus of the research.

The role of entrepreneurship education in promoting entrepreneurial actions remains unclear. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the logic of different types of entrepreneurship education and the effect of learning characteristics in promoting entrepreneurial actions among student entrepreneurs in the higher education setting.

The study employs a quantitative approach involving the use of survey data collected via an Internet tool. The constructs of variables are measured using previously tested scales. The data were analysed using partial least squares modelling because it can handle formative and reflective constructs in the same model and is capable of testing for moderation.

The findings illustrate that voluntary entrepreneurship education generates learning outcomes in terms of students' entrepreneurial actions, which is important because without action, a venture will never be launched. This is especially so if students show a deep learning orientation, while mastery motivation showed a significant and negative moderating effect. This is not the case for compulsory entrepreneurship education.

Embedded in construal level theory, this paper offers knowledge that can help to advance entrepreneurship education research (1) by uncovering the role of different types of entrepreneurship education interventions, (2) by considering students' entrepreneurial actions as the dependent variable and (3) by unravelling the role of students' learning characteristics in the efficacy of entrepreneurship education interventions. By doing this, the study addresses recent repeated calls for more fine-grained research focused on how university students learn in entrepreneurship in higher education and its effects.

Scholars have applied a number of theoretical perspectives to enhance understanding of social entrepreneurial opportunities, and have most recently turned to the lens of critical realism. Although this metatheoretical perspective overcomes some problems with previous views and helps to identify the essence of a construct, the level of abstraction required by this approach leaves unanswered questions related to how social entrepreneurs leverage opportunities. The purpose of this paper is to create a framework to describe social entrepreneurial opportunities in a way that facilitates action and decision-making by social entrepreneurs.

Through adapting Davidsson's (2015) deconstruction of the opportunity construct and using it to inform the pragmatist view of entrepreneurs as theory-testing scientists, this paper develops a framework for understanding social entrepreneurial opportunities. The paper explores the idea that social opportunities are composed of external enablers, a new social venture idea, and social opportunity confidence, and integrates the existing literature on social opportunities into this framework.

Using the framework developed, the authors advance a template of questions, hypotheses and quasi-experimental means that social entrepreneurs can use to determine how to move forward in social opportunity actualization. The authors also expand three categories of research questions that scholars may explore to extend the practical and theoretical understanding of social opportunities.

This work is among the first to adopt the pragmatist lens to elucidate social opportunities in a practical way. It takes an important first step in offering a means for social entrepreneurs to investigate when or where the requisite components of a social entrepreneurial opportunity may exist. Furthermore, it advances the pragmatist perspective of social opportunities by using Davidsson's model to explain the components of theories about what may or may not be a social opportunity.