Search results

Collecting data on social impact and using it in decision-making process in organisation in order to maximise the social value created for people unfortunately is not yet the common practice among social impact actors in Turkey. While the importance of allocating the resources in the most impactful way grows due to the pressing need to tackle increasing social inequalities, the social impact management practices of organisations aiming to contribute to the solution and create positive social impact lag behind. The chapter presents the current approaches and practices on social impact measurement and management of social impact actors in Turkey based on experience of Koç University Social Impact Forum.

The aim of this paper is to determine the criteria for a solid impact evaluation in social entrepreneurship. The solid impact evaluation method is needed for building the bridge between two separate discourses of social entrepreneurship: the discourses of protectionists of social entrepreneurship, who believe without empirical proof that social enterprises are effective and the opponents or doubters in social entrepreneurship, who need empirical proof of the effectiveness of social enterprises.

The criteria for a solid impact evaluation discourse of social entrepreneurship are determined and its impact evaluation is analysed based on literature.

A solid social impact evaluation method should be able to analyse: the social impact of the organisation and not only the financial allocation and outcome; differences in the impact of two organisations which are operating in the same field; and the selection of target group and analysis of all the impacts of the activities.

The list of criteria for a solid impact evaluation might not be complete as it is based on literature review only. As there is a considerable gap between the discourse of protectionists and opponents of social entrepreneurship, additional analyses are required to analyse the discourse of practitioners of social entrepreneurship.

The current study could be used for practitioners as well as for politicians while preparation for the negotiations with the representatives with other sectors as it brings out some of the common topics that are misunderstood by different parties.

This paper takes the first step toward a construction of a solid impact evaluation model. Evaluating the social impact of social enterprises with a solid model could bring closer the discourses of social enterprises used by protectionists and opponents of social entrepreneurship.

The common good refers to contextual conditions that contribute to human wellbeing and flourishing, such as prosperous communities and environmental sustainability. In this paper, we consider how entrepreneurship impacts society by investigating the generalized outcomes of social entrepreneurship on the common good. From a qualitative study of ten large and profitable social enterprises in the United Kingdom, we theorize how social entrepreneurship contributes to the common good in the short and long term. We also conjecture how some commercial practices undermine the common good and further, explain how the common good performs as a conceptual anchor for social entrepreneurship.

Although scaling is considered a “hot topic”, very little is known about how knowledge management (KM) assists in scaling social impact. To fill this gap, the authors draw on knowledge-based and social capital theories and investigate how various KM practices and external networks (e.g. bridging social capital) affect scaling social impact in developing countries.

Applying structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS version 23, the authors conducted a survey with 354 women leaders who are working in women-led social enterprises in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

The authors found that knowledge codification, training and mentoring, and bridging social capital are positively and significantly associated with scaling social impact.

This is one of the pioneering study that explore how KM impacts scaling social impact for women-led social enterprises in the context of a developing country. The authors also extend knowledge-based theory by applying it at the individual level. Finally, the authors enhance the understanding of women entrepreneurship by showing that women entrepreneurs in developing countries are also utilizing bridging social capital to overcome challenges associated with scaling social impact.

Mega construction projects (MCPs), which play an important role in the economy, society and environment of a country, have developed rapidly in recent years. However, due to frequent social conflicts caused by the negative social impact of MCPs, social risk control has become a major challenge. Exploring the relationship between social risk factors and social risk from the perspective of risk evolution and identifying key factors contribute to social risk control; but few studies have paid enough attention to this. Therefore, this study aims to systematically analyze the impact of social risk factors on social risk based on a social risk evolution path.

This study proposed a social risk evolution path for MCPs explaining how social risk occurs and develops with the impact of social risk factors. To further analyze the impact quantitatively, a social risk analysis model combining structural equation model (SEM) with Bayesian network (BN) was developed. SEM was used to verify the relationship in the social risk evolution path. BN was applied to identify key social risk factors and predict the probabilities of social risk, quantitatively. The feasibility of the proposed model was verified by the case of water conservancy projects.

The results show that negative impact on residents’ living standards, public opinion advantage and emergency management ability were key social risk factors through sensitivity analysis. Then, scenario analysis simulated the risk probability results with the impact of different states of these key factors to obtain management strategies.

This study creatively proposes a social risk evolution path describing the dynamic interaction of the social risk and first applies the hybrid SEM–BN method in the social risk analysis for MCPs to explore effective risk control strategies. This study can facilitate the understanding of social risk from the perspective of risk evolution and provide decision-making support for the government coping with social risk in the implementation of MCPs.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effect of structural and relational network capabilities on trust, and its effect on pricing and selling capabilities, as well as their influence on the enterprise social impact.

An explanatory and cross-sectional design was conducted, and 100 managers of Mexican social enterprises were surveyed.

Network structural capability did not affect trust, nevertheless network relational capability did. Likewise, trust influenced pricing and selling capabilities, and these affected the enterprise social impact.

Although a sufficient number of entrepreneurs participated by responding to the survey, the results cannot be generalized to all social enterprises in Mexico.

Social enterprises should capitalize on the development of network relational capability and network structural capability because it facilitates access to scarce resources and positioning of the enterprise to act more actively as an agent of change in its network.

This research identifies the relevance for social enterprises to develop and capitalize on networking and marketing capabilities in their management routines and activities, as this can significantly enhance their social impact.

The main research contributions revealed the importance of dynamic capabilities and their effects on the impact of social enterprises.

The purpose of this paper is to inform scholars and practitioners about the current body of knowledge on the role of social capital in scaling social impact since these concepts are still poorly understood and literature is fragmented despite their importance.

A systematic literature review of 27 highly relevant studies in leading journals is conducted, and the results are synthesized into an integrative theoretical framework.

The framework identifies possible dependent, independent, mediating and moderating variables which conceptualize the role of social capital in scaling social impact.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to systematically map social capital’s role in scaling social impact literature with the help of an integrative theoretical framework. For researchers, this framework would help by providing a shared frame of reference to conceptualize the role of social capital in scaling social impact and identify future research directions. Practitioners can use the findings of this review as a guide while designing and implementing scaling social impact programs.

This paper aims to understand how social finance and impact measurement experts include stakeholders' voices in valuations of social and environmental impact.

The paper used the content analysis of an online discussion forum where experts discussed impact valuation approaches.

Many experts seek impact valuations that take into account the experiences of those whose lives are most affected. Ideally, these accounts need to be emic to (in the language of) those stakeholders, and polyvocal (representing many different stakeholders' voices). However, these experts also seek to effect systemic change by encouraging mainstream financial markets to use social and environmental valuations in their decision-making. These experts consider full plurality too complex to be useable by financial markets, so the experts argue in favor of etic valuations (stated in the language of investors), to appeal to mainstream finance, while endeavoring nonetheless to represent multiple stakeholders' voices. The authors identify two discursive strategies used to resolve this tension: effacing of differences between diverse stakeholders, and overstating the universality of money as a common language.

The terms emic and polyvocal provide experts with nuanced ways to understand “stakeholder voice.” The authors hope these nuances inspire new insights and strategies and help the community with their goal of bridging to mainstream finance.

The paper presents a theoretical framework for describing plurality in impact valuations and examines the challenges of bridging from social finance, which seeks to give voice and representation to those whose lives are most affected, to mainstream finance.