Complements or Substitutes? A Configurational Study of Entrepreneurship and Institutional Frameworks

Abstract

Prior research on entrepreneurial activities and institutional frameworks has substantially advanced our understanding of how isolated institutional factors affect social entrepreneurship (SE) and commercial entrepreneurship (CE). While SE and CE are closely intertwined with government and its institutions to generate social impact, but little is known about how SE, CE, and institutional frameworks combine to produce joint effects on social well-being. We conduct an empirical study with the aim of exploring how SE, CE, and three-pillar institutions work together effectively to promote social well-being. To do so, we utilize the fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) approach to investigate the configurations of substitution and complementarity mechanisms for achieving high and not-high social well-being among 23 economies around the world. Our findings suggest that high social well-being is obtained when CE and SE, post-materialism and socially supportive culture (SSC) are complements. And mutually reinforced CE and SE can substitute for post-materialism and SSC. Moreover, SE generally complements government activism to obtain high social well-being. But, SE also substitutes for government activism when CE offers an alternative. Therefore, our findings reconcile the disagreements between institutional supportive perspective and institutional void perspective.