Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight
Introduction
Social entrepreneurship as a practice that integrates economic and social value creation has a long heritage and a global presence. The global efforts of Ashoka, founded by Bill Drayton in 1980, to provide seed funding for entrepreneurs with a social vision (http://www.ashoka.org); the multiple activities of Grameen Bank, established by Professor Muhammad Yunus in 1976 to eradicate poverty and empower women in Bangladesh (http://www.grameen-info.org); or the use of arts to develop community programs in Pittsburgh by the Manchester Craftsmen's Guild, founded by Bill Strickland in 1968 (http://www.manchesterguild.org): these are all contemporary manifestations of a phenomenon that finds its historical precedents in, among other things, the values of Victorian Liberalism.
While entrepreneurial phenomena aimed at economic development have received a great amount of scholarly attention, entrepreneurship as a process to foster social progress has only recently attracted the interest of researchers (Alvord, Brown, & Letts, 2004; Dees & Elias, 1998). Similar to entrepreneurship in its early days as a field of scholarly endeavor, social entrepreneurship research is still largely phenomenon-driven. Existing most studies are typically based on anecdotal evidence or case studies, applying diverse research designs and methods and introducing insights from other disciplines. Like entrepreneurship, which even today lacks a unifying paradigm (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000), the term “social entrepreneurship” has taken on a variety of meanings (Dees, 1998).
The concept of social entrepreneurship is still poorly defined and its boundaries to other fields of study remain fuzzy. While to some this may appear to be a problem, we see it as a unique opportunity for researchers from different fields and disciplines, such as entrepreneurship, sociology and organizational theory, to challenge and rethink central concepts and assumptions.
This article aims to unveil the core of social entrepreneurship in order to guide future research. Our basic premise is that if social entrepreneurship is to become a structured field of research, an effort must be made to clarify and define key concepts and constructs. To this end, we draw on practical examples of social entrepreneurship to identify and elaborate on the essential components.
While the view of social entrepreneurship put forward in this article is far from complete, we see it as an important first step to enhance our theoretical understanding of the phenomenon and facilitate future research. We contend, with Weick (1995), that a good theory explains, predicts, and delights. This article represents an effort to stimulate research that goes beyond descriptive studies to realize the promise of social entrepreneurship as a source of explanation, prediction, and delight.
The article is organized as follows. First, we examine the meaning of the terms “social” and “entrepreneurship”, which constitute the essence of the phenomenon. We offer a working definition of social entrepreneurship and elaborate on its distinctive characteristics. In a next step, we portray social entrepreneurship as a fascinating playground for different theories and literatures. In particular, we build on sociology and organizational theory and look at how structuration theory and theories on institutional entrepreneurs, social capital and social movements, may contribute to the understanding of social entrepreneurship. We conclude with some questions for future research that could define the future of social entrepreneurship as an area of research.
Section snippets
On the concept of social entrepreneurship
The concept of social entrepreneurship means different things to different people and researchers (Dees, 1998). One group of researchers refers to social entrepreneurship as not-for-profit initiatives in search of alternative funding strategies, or management schemes to create social value (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skiller, 2003; Boschee, 1998). A second group of researchers understands it as the socially responsible practice of commercial businesses engaged in cross-sector partnerships (Sagawa
Perspectives for studying social entrepreneurship
The variegated nature and multiple expressions of social entrepreneurship make it a fascinating playground for different perspectives and literatures. A common feature of emergent fields of research is the absence of clear theoretical boundaries and the need to coalesce thinking from other disciplines. Undoubtedly, this involves the risk that social entrepreneurship “may never gain the consensus and legitimacy that academics seek and may be viewed merely as a venue in which other disciplinary
Final remarks
The objective of this article has been to arouse academic curiosity for social entrepreneurship. We consider social entrepreneurship to be a particularly exciting and fruitful research topic and it is our hope that this article will bring us a step closer toward legitimizing and inspiring social entrepreneurship as a means to create social and economic value and as a field of research.
The working definition of social entrepreneurship put forward in this article is intended to facilitate a more
References (39)
- et al.
Entrepreneurship research in emergence: Past trends and future directions
Journal of Management
(2003) - et al.
Entrepreneurs in service of the poor—Models for business contributions to sustainable development
Business Horizons
(2005) - et al.
Entrepreneurial motivation
Human resource management review
(2003) - et al.
Social entrepreneurship and societal transformation
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science
(2004) Social movements and policy implementation: The Mississippi civil rights movements and the war on poverty, 1965 to 1971
American Sociological Review
(2001)- Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2003). Social entrepreneurship and commercial entrepreneurship: Same,...
Changing the world on a shoestring
Atlantic Monthly
(1998)Social entrepreneurship
Across the Board
(1995)- Boschee, J. (1998). Merging mission and money: A board member's guide to social entrepreneurship....
Outline of a theory of practice
(1977)
Structural holes
The contingent value of social capital
Administrative Science Quarterly
The challenges of combining social and commercial enterprise
Business Ethics Quarterly
Interest and agency in institutional theory
The citizen sector: Becoming as entrepreneurial and competitive as business
California Management Review
The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns
California Management Review
Social skill and institutional theory
American Behavioral Scientist
Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity
Cited by (2174)
How and why do social entrepreneurs experience goal conflict differently?
2024, Journal of Business Venturing InsightsFearful pathways to social entrepreneurship intention: A fuzzy-set qualitative content analysis
2024, International Journal of Management EducationThe impact of liability of foreignness on performance in hybrid organizations
2024, Journal of International ManagementHow Might I change the world? Enriching Social Impact and Career Aspirations With a Global Experiential Instructional Innovation
2024, Journal of Management EducationDigital technologies, social entrepreneurship and resilience during crisis in developing countries: evidence from Nigeria
2024, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research