The Social Enterprise as an Alternative Work Option for Persons with Developmental Disabilities: A Case Study of Staff Perspectives at Common Ground Co-operative

Traditional employment options for persons with developmental disabilities are lacking. Employment options available for persons with developmental disabilities are reflective of the medical and social model perspectives of disability; with segregated and supported employment reinforcing the idea that persons with developmental disabilities are incapable and competitive employment missing the necessary accommodations for persons to be successful. This study examined social enterprises as an alternative employment option that can balance both medical and social model perspectives by accommodating for weaknesses or limitations and recognizing the strengths and capabilities of persons with developmental disabilities in the workplace. Moreover, this study is part of a broader case study which is examining the nature and impacts of a social enterprise, known as Common Ground Co-operative (CGC), which supports five social purpose businesses that are owned and operated by persons with developmental disabilities. This study is part of the Social Business and Marginalized Social Groups Community-University Research Alliance. To date, a case study has been written describing the nature and impacts of CGC and its related businesses from the perspectives of the Partners, board members, funders and staff (Owen, Readhead, Bishop, Hope & Campbell, in press & Readhead, 2012). The current study used a descriptive case study approach to provide a detailed account of the perceptions and opinions of CGC staff members who support each of the Partners in the five related businesses. Staff members were chosen for the focus of this study because of the integral role that they play in the successful outcomes of the persons they support. This study was conducted in two phases. In the first phase five staff members were interviewed. During this stage of interviews, several themes were presented which needed to be examined in further detail, specifically staff stress and burnout and duty of care for business Partners versus the promotion of their autonomy. A second phase of interviews was then conducted with one individual participant and a focus group of seven. During both interview phases, Staff participants described an employment model that creates a non-judgemental environment for the business Partners that promotes their strengths, accommodates for their limitations, provides educational opportunities and places the responsibility for the businesses on the persons with developmental disabilities cultivating equality and promoting independence. Staff described the nature of their role including risk factors for stress, the protective factors that buffer stress, and the challenges associated with balancing many role demands. Issues related to the replication of this social enterprise model are described.

Social Economy and Developmental Disabilities: An Employment Option that Promotes a Form of Authentic Work and Fosters Social Inclusion

Typical employment options for people with developmental disabilities are insufficient. Most employment opportunities that are community-based provide typical workplace and geographical inclusion but tend not to support social inclusion and "belonging". This study explored the innovative employment alternative of social businesses and considered this form of employment for persons with a developmental disability as a viable avenue for meaningful work and social inclusion. A total of six business partners with a developmental disability were interviewed; two partners from three separate worker owned businesses. The partners' descriptions of their job and their workplace composed the interpretative findings. The social businesses provided an avenue for this group of people who tend to be segregated in isolated workshops or marginalized in mainstream work environments and who feel a sense of being "outsiders" to participate in meaningful work in community settings. This group of partners described their job as authentic "work" and discussed the many skills and the work ethic learned from their employment opportunity. In addition to the instrumental aspects of the job, the partners also discussed the group autonomy and self-determination of being their own "bosses". The partners confidently expressed feeling valued, understood in the context of others with similar life experiences, attached to the workplace and connected to a larger community as important outcomes of their businesses. These criteria of social inclusion (Hall, 2010) were complemented by teamwork, friendship and ultimately, with a feeling of being genuine "insiders". Replication of this innovative employment model would be recommended for groups of marginalized people with DD in other geographic areas.

Job Demands and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Roles of Organizational Commitment and Social Interaction

Drawing from the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model and research on social exchange relationships, this study investigates the impact of three job demands (work overload, interpersonal conflict, and dissatisfaction with the organization’s current situation) on employees’ organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), the hitherto unexplored mediating role of organizational commitment in the link between job demands and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), as well as how this mediating effect might be moderated by social interaction. Using a multi-source, two-wave research design, surveys were administered to 707 employees and their supervisors in a Mexican-based organization. The hypotheses were tested with hierarchical regression analysis. The results indicate a direct negative relationship between interpersonal conflict and OCB, and a mediating effect of organizational commitment for interpersonal conflict and dissatisfaction with the organization’s current situation. Further, social interaction moderates the mediating effect of organizational commitment for each of the three job demands such that the mediating effect is weaker at higher levels of social interaction. The study suggests that organizations aiming to instill OCB among their employees should match the immediate work context surrounding their task execution with an internal environment that promotes informal relationship building.

Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Governance, And Managerial Risk-Taking

This dissertation investigates the association between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and managerial risk-taking, as well as the differences in governance structure that affect this association. Using a sample of US public firms from 1995 to 2009, we find that firms with strong CSR records engage in higher risk-taking. Furthermore, we find that this relationship is robust when accounting for differences in governance structure and correcting for endogeneity via simultaneous equations modeling. Additional testing indicates that performance in the employee relations dimension of CSR in particular increases with risk-taking, while high firm visibility dampens the association between CSR and the accounting-based measures of risk-taking. Prior literature establishes that high managerial risk-tolerance is necessary for the undertaking of risky yet value-enhancing investment decisions. Thus, the main findings suggest that CSR, rather than being a waste of scarce corporate resources, is instead an important aspect of shareholder value creation. They contribute to the debate on CSR by documenting that corporate risk-taking is one mechanism among others through which CSR maps into higher firm value.

Explaining voice behaviour: The roles of personal resources, social interdependence, and supervisor leadership style

This study contributes to current research on voice behaviour by investigating several under-explored drivers that motivate employees’ expression of constructive ideas about work-related issues. It draws from the concept of psychological climate to examine how voice behaviour is influenced by employees’ (1) personal resources (tenacity and passion for work), (2) perceptions of social interdependence (task and outcome interdependence), and (3) supervisor leadership style (transformational and transactional). Using a multi-source research design, surveys were administered to 226 employees and to 24 supervisors at a Canadian-based not-for-profit organization. The hypotheses are tested with hierarchical regression analysis. The results indicate that employees are more likely to engage in voice behaviour to the extent that they exhibit higher levels of passion for work. Further, their voice behaviour is lower to the extent that their supervisor adopts a transformational leadership style characterized by high performance expectations or a transactional leadership style based on contingent rewards and contingent punishment behaviours. The study reveals that there are no significant effects of tenacity, social interdependence, and behaviour-focused transformational leadership on voice. The findings have significant implications for organizations that seek to encourage employee behaviours that help improve current work practices or undo harmful situations.