Abstract
Social entrepreneurship is a paradoxical phenomenon wherein seemingly incompatible elements such as business and social logics coexist. Previous research has been insufficient to systematically describe how social entrepreneurship organizations (SEO) try to balance these logics and why these same paradoxical elements make social entrepreneurship what it is. Using the systematic literature review method, this paper examines six major paradoxes and how they affect both the theory and practice of social entrepreneurship by furthering the nascent discussion about the role of paradoxes in SEOs. Viewed through the lens of organizational logics, this paper argues that the dynamic interplay between these paradoxes initiates and drives the innovations and changes necessary for the very existence of SEOs.
Highlights
Social problems are wickedly complex and unsolvable, yet understandable and addressable
Peattie and Morley [2] introduced paradoxes using Haugh’s [3] template and called for further studies on this topic: Whether [social enterprises] of different types and in different sectors and contexts tend to develop a hybrid position on all these organisational dimensions, or whether they create unique “mix and match” blends of characteristics which are each more typical of either commercial or non-profit sector organisations would be an interesting issue for future research to explore
Collaboration may enable social entrepreneurship organizations (SEO) to grow and further address social needs without losing touch with their mission and clients. When reflecting on these paradoxes summarized from the literature, two core issues should be emphasized: one is that paradoxes reflect the hybrid nature of logics that cannot be completely merged; the other is that paradoxical logics reveal a dialectic process that will lead to a synergistic effect
Summary
Social problems are wickedly complex and unsolvable, yet understandable and addressable. This apparent contradiction shapes the way social entrepreneurs approach social problems. There is a consensus among scholars that social entrepreneurship is a paradoxical phenomenon—an amalgamation of ostensibly incompatible elements that somehow work together. How those elements work together despite their differences has been previously studied. Sarwar [1] takes a prescriptive approach towards how to solve three paradoxes of social entrepreneurship—the accountability paradox, the excludability paradox, and the resiliency paradox. Peattie and Morley [2] introduced paradoxes using Haugh’s [3] template (defining the scope of social entrepreneurship, the environmental context, opportunity recognition and innovation, modes of organization, resource acquisition, opportunity exploitation, performance measurement, training education, and learning about social entrepreneurship) and called for further studies on this topic: Whether [social enterprises] of different types and in different sectors and contexts tend to develop a hybrid position on all these organisational dimensions, or whether they create unique “mix and match” blends of characteristics which are each more typical of either commercial or non-profit sector organisations would be an interesting issue for future research to explore
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
