Concept Of Social Entrepreneurship Research Articles

DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP: CHALLENGE FOR LITHUANIAN RESEARCHERS

Research in social sciences is developing rather quickly nowadays because technological and economic progress requires quick response to new challenges. As competitiveness in the world rises, enterprises should try to adapt, react, and change their activity, processes. Pressure of society develops new features of entrepreneurship also. The concept of sustainable development changed a lot of viewpoints in social research also. Entrepreneurship becomes not only socially responsible, but gets a new definition – social entrepreneurship. Social entrepreneurship could be identified differently. Traditional entrepreneurship is kept as economic, as “social entrepreneurship” concept from the first sight makes impression of simply socially oriented business activity. Is it only or really that? Research of social entrepreneurship is actual from several points: it is important researching new dimensions of economic phenomenon; positive economic effect of entrepreneurship makes higher the importance of its research; especially it is important for Lithuanian enterprises get involved in scientific researches for them, improving their activity. So, a scientific problem becomes important: how social entrepreneurship could be identified and described and what role does it play. Research purpose of the article is to analyse social entrepreneurship concept, emphasizing entrepreneurship research development in Lithuania. A research object of the article is social entrepreneurship. Research tasks are: to analyse social entrepreneurship as a phenomenon, to identify its main features; to make analysis of development of entrepreneurship research in Lithuania: does it analyse social entrepreneurship. Research methods are scientific literature analysis, comparative analysis. The results of the article : the research disclosed that traditional entrepreneurship is developing and getting such new dimensions as social; the different definitions and approaches of social entrepreneurship were analysed; the most important result of for-profit social entrepreneurs is economic plus social success; in Lithuania entrepreneurship research is rather fragmented, analysing different aspects, there are rather few scientists working in this sphere; social entrepreneurship is almost not researched in Lithuanian context. It is important to develop entrepreneurship research in Lithuania, because it might help enterprises to become entrepreneurial, initiate new business start-up. New dimensions in entrepreneurship as social entrepreneurship are opportunities for enterprises become competitive in the market. The research in the article gives an answer to the question asked in the title of the article: from research viewpoint, social entrepreneurship is rather new in Lithuania. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.eis.0.6.1498

Social Entrepreneurs, Social Enterprise and Social Entrepreneurship: A Synthesis of Perspectives

The concept of social entrepreneurship is increasingly being used and discussed across a wide spectrum of stakeholders and entities ranging from academia to economic policy makers. Following some o...

Social Entrepreneurship in Youth Culture: Morganics, Russell Simmons and Emile “XY?” Jansen

This article utilizes the concept of social entrepreneurship to explore one aspect of the increasing incorporation of youth cultures into the mainstream, in which youth culture participants undertake private and public sector roles simultaneously. The concept of social entrepreneurship is useful in understanding the mainstreaming of youth culture, suggesting that it does not just have value as a form of resistive expression, but can be harnessed by practitioners for both profit and socially progressive ends. Taking the subculture of hip hop as a case study, three contexts are explored — Morganics in Australia, “Russell Simmons: Philanthropist” in the USA and Emile “XY?” Jansen of the South African hip hop crew Black Noise. This investigation reveals how the concept of social entrepreneurship is inflected in local contexts, examining key differences around assets, funding, the role of government, the type of social entrepreneurship and the conditions under which it operates.

Social Competencies in Childhood and Adolescence and Entrepreneurship in Young Adulthood: A Two-study Analysis

Contributing to the literature on early precursors of entrepreneurship, this study investigated the role of early social competencies for an entrepreneurial career choice and entrepreneurial success in young adulthood. We utilized data from the British Cohort Study and the Thuringian Founder Study (Germany), thereby comparing results across countries, study designs (e.g., retrospective vs. prospective), and concepts of early social competencies and entrepreneurship. In the British analyses, which concentrated on self-employment among the creative class, we found that social competencies in childhood (i.e., social skills and peer popularity at age 10) predicted entrepreneurial status at age 34, continuity in entrepreneurial activity (age 30 and 34) as well as earnings among the self-employed (age 34). In the German data, we found that entrepreneurial forms of social competencies in adolescence (i.e., leadership and early commercialization activities at age 14 or 15) predicted the process of starting an innovative business in young adulthood (entrepreneurial intentions, progress in the venture creation process, and business success in the post-startup phase). The results are discussed with an emphasis on possible pathways connecting early social competencies and enterprising behavior in young adulthood.

Entrepreneurs: The world needs you

AbstractThe way we see the role of business is changing dramatically. What have we learned from the recent and ongoing crises? Where does one look for guidance on the “right thing to do” now? In a world where we live on one globe, it is time to shift our energy to real responsibility and sustainability. This requires a new paradigm. As Albert Einstein said, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” We are not separated from our environment, nature, and society; we are actually a part of it.Therefore, let us unleash entrepreneurship and the power of business in a way to serve us more holistically. This new type of thinking, this expanding consciousness, is giving birth to all the new concepts of social entrepreneurship, corporate social responsibility, corporate sustainability, inclusive business, conscious capitalism, and sustainable development.On the global level, there are increasing numbers of business‐oriented initiatives aimed at steering the power of business toward the public good such as the UN Global Compact and the Business Call to Action. Where to look for inspiration at the individual level? Within yourself. As Mahatma Gandhi said, “You have to be the change you want to see in the world.” © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The social value of productive entrepreneurship

As a critical contribution to the social entrepreneurship literature, this paper first engages the concept of social entrepreneurship. Situating it within the distinctive context of charity and philanthropy, it provides structure and clarity. Next, it identifies related sources of social impact and value creation, positing social and economic value creation as potentially overlapping. It then provides comparative case studies focusing on Microsoft Corporation and Grameen Bank, to illustrate these issues relative to productive and social entrepreneurship. Recognized as highly successful innovative ventures, these two enterprises have had profound social impact on the world, even if that impact is derived from very different perspectives and motivations.

‘Newness’ in Social Entrepreneurship Discourses: The Concept of ‘Danwei’ in the Chinese Experience

It has been suggested that the concept of danwei functions as a key structural element within Chinese urban society (R. Sévigny, S. Chen, and E.Y. Chen, 2009, Personal experience of schizophrenia and the role of danwei: a case study on 1990's Beijing, Cult Med Psychiatry, 33, 86–111). However, the relevance of the danwei to social entrepreneurship in China has not yet been identified let alone fully mapped out. Instead, the discourse relating to social entrepreneurship in China has typically been driven by Anglo-American models of entrepreneurship that emphasize novelty, whilst marginalizing the more established traditions of social movements within Chinese society. This has potentially significant implications for the concept, and project, of social entrepreneurship in China. In addition, western notions of social entrepreneurship can be enriched by the consideration of ‘oriental’ categories ofthought. This paper shows how the concept of social entrepreneurship tends to ‘evolve in its specific environment’ (J. Defourny and S.-Y. Kim, 2011, Emerging models of social enterprise in Eastern Asia: a cross-country analysis, Social enterprise journal, 7 (1), 86–111) and suggests that the evolution of the discourse and meanings of social entrepreneurship is rarely politically neutral or uncontested.

Development of a conceptual model to understand international social entrepreneurship and its application in the Ugandan context

While the concept of social entrepreneurship is relatively new, initiatives that employ entrepreneurial capacities to solve social problems have existed throughout history. In this paper, the factors explaining international social entrepreneurial behavior are investigated. The key argument is that behavioral potential, which is at the cognitive level, is influenced by an individual's perceptions toward social enterprise venturing. These perceptions could be related to feasibility, desirability, or propensity to act, among others. Personal, sociological, and environmental variables are linked to decision making through these perceptions. This research is based on literature review and case studies. The analysis indicates that individuals' perceptions or attitudes can explain aspects of their international social entrepreneurial potential. Areas for future research are discussed.

A conceptual model for social entrepreneurship directed toward social impact on society

PurposeThe emerging literature on social entrepreneurship and its role in economic development and social value creation is riddled with inconsistencies, overlapping definitions, and contradictions. However, the theoretical and practical importance of developing and applying social entrepreneurship to sustain social development and enhance human well‐being in rapidly changing environments has catapulted this issue to the forefront of the research agendas of many scholars. In light of advancement, the purpose of this paper is to clarify the concept of social entrepreneurship. Further, a conceptual model is developed encompassing antecedents and consequence of social entrepreneurship in an integrated framework.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on the work of others and to this adds personal conclusions from both direct experience and observation.FindingsThe central argument is that desirability and feasibility of social entrepreneur in the decision‐making process, human capital, and social capital at the individual level will have the positive effects on social entrepreneurship. The author also discusses the moderation effects between the desirability and feasibility of social entrepreneur in the decision‐making process on initiating social entrepreneurship activities. Moreover, it is argued that social and institutional environment factors also promote social entrepreneurship activities which push the social improvement.Originality/valueThe paper presents a theoretical research model incorporating antecedents and consequence of social entrepreneurship to direct a future research agenda. The paper could be used as the research model by researchers to empirically test antecedents and consequences of social entrepreneurship. Moreover, practitioners can also gain benefits from the conceptual framework and promote social entrepreneurship.

Social Entrepreneurship: Beyond the Hype

pists, donor organizations, the not-for-profit sector, international organizations, academia, the media, and the public at large. Business schools in particular find the concept of social entrepreneurship very appealing, given its combination of social virtue and business acumen. Numerous business schools have established centers dedicated to social entrepreneurship, including the University of California, Berkeley, Stanford, Harvard, Duke, the University of British Columbia, INSEAD, Oxford, and the National University of Singapore. The list of business schools offering research or teaching on social entrepreneurship without having created a center specifically dedicated to the topic is much longer. This popularity has brought significant resources to social entrepreneurship in the form of both talent and money. However, it is not clear precisely what social entrepreneurship is. Gregory Dees, a prominent scholar in this field, wrote in 1998, “Though the concept of ‘social entrepreneurship’ is gaining in popularity, it means different things to different people. This can be confusing.” Ten years later the definitional dispute continues, and it has taken a toll. After an extensive in-depth survey in 2008, the Center for Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship reports, “Even our most knowledgeable informants did not agree on a definition of social entrepreneurship. Definition is one of the biggest problems in the field” (emphasis in the original). Proponents of social entrepreneurship disagree about issues such as whether it includes only not-for-profit or also for-profit ventures, whether the focus should be on individuals or on organizations, whether the change involved must be systemic or can be incremental, and whether to include only successful ventures or also failed attempts. Some argue about the term itself and suggest that “social innovation” is a better choice. One way to avoid the disputes would be to have a defi-

Social entrepreneurship: an overview of its theoretical evolution and proposed research model

Social entrepreneurship is an emerging area of research in the entrepreneurship and related disciplines. Social entrepreneurship is seen as differing from other forms of entrepreneurship because of the higher priority given to promoting social and development economic values. A review of the literature emerging from a number of disciplines reveals that the definition of the concept of social entrepreneurship is fragmented and confusing. Current conceptualisations of social entrepreneurship fail to effectively consider the unique characteristics of social entrepreneurs and the context within which they must operate. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to advance the conceptualisation of the concept by adding some clarity to the debate.

Is Social Entrepreneurship an Untapped Marketing Resource? A Commentary on its Potential for Small Sports Clubs

Over the years, there have been many discussions about the meaning of the term entrepreneur andhow we encapsulate entrepreneurial behaviour. Recent attempts to extend this thinking to the concept of socialentrepreneurship have undoubtedly added to this discussion. This commentary considers the value of sociallymotivated entrepreneurs to the not-for-profit sector and is based on the premise that social entrepreneurshipfocuses on bringing innovative solutions to socially related problems. The discussion will use the example ofSmall Sports Clubs to illustrate the key issues.

Shareholder Value, Shared Value, or Social Value Creation - The Troubles of Managing for More than One Bottom Line

The financial crisis of 2007/08 has caused many to question the basic premises of the current business system. ‘Business as usual’ has come under heavy scrutiny. Achieving environmental and social sustainability stand out as some of the major challenges that current business leaders have to deal with (Jackson & Nelson, 2004). Social Entrepreneurs who address social or environmental problems in innovative ways could thus serve as role models to 21st century leaders. In a manner unsettling to traditional management styles, social entrepreneurs try most often to create shared value and pursue dual objectives (Alter, 2006; Pirson, 2008a; Rangan, Quelch, Herrero, & Barton, 2007). Achieving positive social and environmental impact is considered key to the motivation (Yunus, 2008). It is assumed that social entrepreneurs are able to create shared value in the sense that they create social and environmental impact while earning income and be financially sustainable (Elkington & Hartigan, 2008). This seemingly simple assumption questions longstanding economic research, and questions some of the basic foundations of organizational research. Scholars in economics and management have long made the case that general welfare is increased most by organizations that maximize a single objective function. Jensen (2002) even opined that without a single objective function, no firm could be managed meaningfully. Accordingly, if organizations were now to focus on a balance of different goals, they would necessarily undermine their impact and not maximize their potential. This tension between the practice of social entrepreneurship and the theoretical insights merit further study, since all too easily proponents of either side end up making arguments based more on ideology and wishful thinking rather than facts. Hence in the below paper, I will examine the question whether social enterprises can indeed create shared value and if so, under what circumstances. After a short introduction to the concept of social entrepreneurship, I will then present three cases of rather prominent social enterprises and analyze their evolution. I will conclude by presenting the conditions in which shared value creation can be managed, and in which circumstances maximization strategies prove superior.

Identifying Social Entrepreneurs Serving the Poor at the Base of the Pyramid

The concept of social entrepreneurship as a characterization of social responsibility for business organizations has gained considerable popularity. There is growing belief in developmental and donor communities that this form of for-profit activity might be the long-sought panacea for solving poverty at the so-called Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP) - the poorest segment of the society. Yet, there is no consensus within these communities as to what constitutes social entrepreneurship, and how the BoP is defined. Confusion arises from the absence of generally accepted definitions for both terms, leaving much scope for some conventional for-profit activities to assert a higher social service status. This paper attempts to clarify what constitutes social entrepreneurships serving the BOP segment of the population, and how BoP may be defined to better represent the poor.

Social Entrepreneurship in Tanzania: Assessment of Enabling Environment

The main purpose of the study was to assess the supporting environment for social entrepreneurship in Tanzania. Specifically, the study aimed at evaluating the current key stakeholders’ conceptualisation and recognition of Social Entrepreneurship concept and whether in Tanzania there is a supportive environment for Social Entrepreneurship. This was an exploratory study and was conducted qualitatively. The approach used was a combination of secondary data and in-depth interviews with policy makers and policy advisers. Findings revealed that most stakeholders are not aware of the concept of Social Entrepreneurship. The objectives of their organizations showed that they had some elements of Social Entrepreneurship, but this concept was not encompassed in their mission statements. Social entrepreneurship matters were thus not well integrated in their policy missions although the nature of organizational activities revealed some elements in them. The study concluded that social entrepreneurship in Tanzania has been practiced by several institutions especially non-governmental organisations and that there is a need to document and institutionalizes the policies and regulations that guide the operationalization of the social entrepreneurship concept. Recommendations and areas for further research are also discussed.

Conceptions of Social Enterprise and Social Entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences and Divergences

The concepts of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship are making amazing breakthroughs in EU countries and the United States. Until recently, the debates on both sides of the Atlantic have taken place in parallel trajectories with few connections among them. In the first part of the paper, we describe the European and US historical landscapes in which those concepts took root. In the second part, we analyse how the various conceptualizations have evolved. This analysis paves the way for the third part, in which we highlight the conceptual convergences and divergences among regions as well as within the US and European landscapes.

The Creative Capitalism Spectrum: Evaluating Corporate Social Responsibility Through a Legal Lens Abstract

In this Article, I contend that directors who purposely refuse to consider corporate social responsibility and related practices, the social return on investment, or the double bottom line could be found potentially liable for breach of good faith under the standard recently articulated by the Delaware Supreme Court. Moreover, it may be a material misstatement and therefore actionable if a corporation makes a false statement claiming to be socially responsible.I introduce an entirely new and original way to define CSR under the “Creative Capitalism Spectrum,” providing guidance about whether a company can legitimately claim to be socially responsible. Recent scholarship has been devoted to redefining CSR, but it fails to take into account the legal implications of making public statements about CSR. The Creative Capitalism Spectrum provides directors with objective guidelines based on legal principles to corroborate a public statement of a corporation’s social responsibility. The Article distinguishes the concept of social entrepreneurship from other forms of CSR, and insists that full compliance with laws affecting social issues is a precondition to a claim of social responsibility. The Article confronts the growing problem of “greenwashing,” a term rapidly becoming a buzzword to describe companies who purport to employ environmentally responsible practices but fall short. Furthermore, I introduce a five-factor test boards can use to determine whether CSR projects or policies are justifiable uses of corporate resources. The five factors were pulled from various sources and reorganized to form the anagram PRISM: Potential, Relevance, Impact, Suitability, and Morale. This PRISM test should serve as guidance to directors and courts, especially as boards come under fire for engaging in CSR projects that ultimately do not prove to be financially beneficial to stockholders. Directors seeking protection under the Business Judgment Rule need the PRISM test to serve as an objective standard to demonstrate that they acted in a reasonably informed manner, in good faith, and that their decisions did not violate their fiduciary duty of due care.

Beyond Nongovernmental Development Action into Social Entrepreneurship

This article presents a reflective perspective on the scope that social entrepreneurship offers to non-governmental development work in the Indian context. Beginning with the early corporate efforts to do good to society, the article outlines the history of nongovernmental action through its charity, community welfare, developmental and mobilisational and ‘post-developmentalist neo-liberal political economy’ phases. It then reviews the concept of social entrepreneurship as it has developed in Western liberal democracies where a rethinking of the welfare state has taken place. While the ideology of social entrepreneurship seems to reside naturally in the current phase, only some of its aspects seem to offer growth trajectories for non-governmental work in the near future. Though the foundations and trusts that the early business entrepreneurs established did provide the initial stratum for future non-governmental work, in recent times the charitable-philanthropic orientation of business has evolved into a socially entrepreneurial form, often involving partnerships with the third sector. For the mix of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), especially those which have political goals like empowerment and social justice, social entrepreneurship, in its strict form, seems to have little to offer. But key features of the social entrepreneurial process, namely socially entrepreneurial behaviour, and more importantly social innovation—new ways of solving social problems, resourcefulness, larger scale and wider impact and solutions that are transferable, scalable and cost-effective—are important future directions for all kinds of NGOs, including those whose primary thrust is empowerment and social justice. However, non-governmental organisations need to reaffirm the primacy of the civic in their purpose constantly—aware and positively critical of the ideological undercurrents that influence and shape their responses.

Social Entrepreneurship: Perspectives on an Academic Discipline

The concept of social entrepreneurship has become increasingly popular in the discourse of academic departments. This paper explores several aspects of social entrepreneurship and the questions that arise when attempting to place the field within one discipline. Connections are made to the potential contribution of a transdisciplinary approach to the scholarly inquiry of social entrepreneurship. It concludes by suggesting that transdisciplinarity may result in greater accuracy in the data collected. [Article copies available for a fee from The Transformative Studies Institute. E-mail address: jour

Social Entrepreneurship: Toward a Better Understanding of the Concept (L'Entrepreneuriat Social, Mieux Connaitre Le Concept)

Entrepreneurship is a recognized concept both for research and practice. It is possible to find university courses, research published in specialized journals, associations dedicated to entrepreneurship promotion and governmental support. In a regional economic development context, a special form of entrepreneurship could achieve other objectives. Social entrepreneurship is an emergent concept earning more popularity than ever around the planet. However the concept is not well known. The objective of the paper is to present an overview of the social entrepreneurship concept.