From social foresight to social entrepreneurship: pathways to sustainability

This study asks the central question, ‘Are social entrepreneurs using foresight to create innovation based on triple bottom line sustainability measures?’ and ‘if so, how?’ Sustainability is the emergent criteria for evaluating many aspects of the social world, including corporate governance, health systems, economics, social welfare and the environment. All the while, innovation is one of the key factors in the constitution of our social worlds, be this legislative, organisational, social or technical change. Therefore, it appears that the drive toward sustainability should be coupled with an emphasis on innovation – in particular creating innovation toward sustainability. Yet unexamined assumptions exist behind such language. Sustainability is a concept within the context of ‘the future’, requiring one to question ‘what is the future’ – in essence a utilisation of the strategic capacity for foresight. Foresight, moreover, ranges from the tacit assumed personal foresight of the ordinary individual to the specialised foresight of the professional forecaster, scenario planner, or foresight practitioner.

Is social entrepreneurship the way forward? The case of the livingin collective

Social entrepreneurship can be conceived generally as a creative force born to address emergent or longstanding unfulfilled community needs occurring within or across the non-profit, business or government sectors. In this paper, we consider the current case study of a collective comprising a non-profit community organisation, pro-bono design group and university researchers and its attempts to negotiate the tension between social innovation and social entrepreneurship in order to address the lack of suitable options for independent living for individuals with disabilities and their families. With much of the developed world coming to terms with a rapidly aging population, and increased survival rates for individuals with disabilities, there has never been a more opportune time to consider work such as this which attempts to address social and market gaps in a socially innovative and inclusive way.

Social enterprise versus social entrepreneurship : an examination of the ‘why’ and ‘how’ in pursuing social change

This article critically considers distinctions between, social enterprise and social entrepreneurship from a theoretical perspective. Using case study analysis of 10 non-governmental organisations the paper explores these concepts empirically. Findings on social enterprise reveal a focus on the purpose of social businesses, while findings on social entrepreneurship reveal an emphasis on the processes underlying innovative and entrepreneurial activity for social purposes. Discussion of these findings indicates important developments relevant to informing the growing area of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship research. Implications extend to understanding the need for action to achieve social change, and an acceptance of risk when existing actions fail to achieve their intended outcomes.

Is it possible to measure social entrepreneurship in firms?

[EN] This study defines and proposes a measurement scale for social entrepreneurship (SE) in its broadest sense. The broad definition of SE covers for-profit firms that use social aims as a core component of their strategy. By pursuing social aims, these firms can boost the value of their products or services for consumers or exploit new business areas. Under this broad definition of SE, profit-seeking and the pursuit of social aims converge, thereby revealing a form of SE that has received little attention in either theoretical or empirical research. To fill this research gap, the present study proposes a measurement scale to measure broad SE in firms. The process used to build the scale draws upon research by Churchill (1979) and DeVellis (1991) and combines the Delphi technique, a pre-test questionnaire and structural equation modelling. The main aim of this research is to develop a scale capable of measuring broad SE in firms. The theoretical basis for the scale is supported by an empirical study in the hotel sector. The scale provides a valid, reliable instrument for measuring broad SE in firms. The scale meets all sociometric properties required of measurement scales in the social sciences, namely dimensionality, reliability and validity.

Building Smarter Cities through Social Entrepreneurship

The objective of the present study is to examine the extent to which social ventures are able to increase the smartness of the cities. To achieve this goal, we adopt a qualitative approach, based on the case study method to obtain valuable insights about different characteristics and strategies of Cais (a non-profit association dedicated to help disadvantaged people in urban areas). By focusing on the analysis of the Cais activities, we assess whether its social intervention match the dimensions proposed by Giffinger et al. (2007) to rank smart cities’ performance, namely if it has smart: (i) economy; (ii) people; (iii) governance; (iv) mobility; (v) environment; and (vi) living. The research shows that the action pursued comprises elements from all the above mentioned dimensions. Further, the analysis reveals that Cais reinforces the smartness of the city where it acts (attributes such as living, economy, people, and environment).

Consulting to social entrepreneurship initiatives - using business skills to help solve social problems: ERG: A sustainable approach

A Work Project, presented as part of the requirements for the Award of a Masters Degree in Management from the NOVA – School of Business and Economics

The characteristics of social entrepreneurship business models in Portugal

This work project is based on the MIES (Map of Innovation and Social Entrepreneurship in Portugal) database and it aims to understand the characteristics of social business models in the context of the portuguese market, by determining whether they follow the proposed characteristics by John Elkington and Pamela Hartigan, and then adding to their matrix. Furthermore, it tries to determine success patterns by comparing a group of successful social ventures with a group of less successful ones, with the objective of increasing the knowledge of social entrepreneurship as it applies to Portugal and provide a framework for future study.

Institutional framing of CSR and social entrepreneurship interactions in South Africa

Objectives. This paper considers the intersection of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and social entrepreneurship in South Africa through the lens of institutional theories and draws upon a number of illustrative case study examples. In particular it: (1) charts the historically evolving relationship between CSR and social entrepreneurship in South Africa, and how this relationship has been informed by institutional changes since the end of apartheid, particularly over the last few years; (2) identifies different interactional relationship forms between social enterprises and corporates engaging in CSR, with an emphasis on new innovative multi-stakeholder partnerships; and (3) considers internal engagements with social responsibility by SME social enterprises in South Africa. Prior Work. Reflecting South Africa’s history of division, the controversial role of business during apartheid, and the ongoing legacies of that period, the South African government has been particularly pro-active in encouraging companies to contribute to development and societal transformation through CSR and Black Economic Empowerment (BEE). Accordingly a substantial body of work now exists examining and critically reflecting upon CSR and BEE across a range of sectors. In response to perceived problems with BEE, efforts have recently been made to foster broader-based economic empowerment. However the implications of these transitions for the relationship between CSR and social entrepreneurship in South Africa have received scant academic attention. Approach. Analysis is undertaken of legislative and policy changes in South Africa with a bearing on CSR and social entrepreneurship. Data collected during fieldwork in South Africa working with 6 social enterprise case studies is utilised including qualitative data from key informant interviews, focus groups with stakeholders and observational research. Results. The paper considers the historically evolving relationship between CSR and social entrepreneurship in South Africa informed by institutional change. Five different relationship forms are identified and illustrated with reference to case examples. Finally internal engagement with social responsibility concerns by small and medium social enterprises are critically discussed. Implications. This paper sheds light on some of the innovative partnerships emerging between corporates and social enterprises in South Africa. It reflects on some of the strengths and weaknesses of South Africa’s policy and legislative approaches. Value. The paper provides insights useful for academic and practitioner audiences. It also has policy relevance, in particularly for other African countries potentially looking to follow South Africa’s example, in the development of legislative and policy frameworks to promote corporate responsibility, empowerment and transformation.

Social entrepreneurship in Sub-Saharan Africa

Responding to calls for a better understanding of the relationship between social enterprises and their environments, this article focuses on contextual influences on social entrepreneurship in sub-Saharan Africa. We identify four predominantly African contextual dimensions, i.e., acute poverty, informality, colonial history, and ethnic group identity, and explore their influence on the way social ventures perceive themselves and on their choice of activities. Our empirical study of 384 social enterprises from 19 sub-Saharan African countries suggests that ethnic group identity and high poverty levels influence both self-perception and activity choices, while the country’s colonial history only influences self-perception and informality has no significant influence on either. These findings point to the need to consider both self-perception and the choice of activities in defining social entrepreneurship. Our study also highlights the importance of African contextual dimensions for understanding social entrepreneurship, and underlines the added value of incorporating insights from African data into management research more broadly.

Social entrepreneurship in South Africa: exploring the influence of environment

The influence of environment on social entrepreneurship requires more concerted examination. This paper contributes to emerging discussions in this area through consideration of social entrepreneurship in South Africa. Drawing upon qualitative case study research with six social enterprises, and examined through a framework of new institutional theories and writing on new venture creation, this research explores the significance of environment for the process of social entrepreneurship, for social enterprises, and for social entrepreneurs. Our findings provide insights on institutional environments, social entrepreneurship, and the interplay between them in the South African context, with implications for wider social entrepreneurship scholarship.

Social innovation and social entrepreneurship a systematic review

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature suggests CSR initiatives extend beyond meeting the immediate interests of stakeholders of for-profit enterprises, offering the potential to also enhance performance. Growing disillusionment of for-profit business models has drawn attention to social entrepreneurship and social innovation to ease social issues. Adopting a systematic review of relevant research, the article provides collective insights into research linking social innovation with social entrepreneurship, demonstrating growing interest in the area over the last decade. The past 5 years have seen a surge in attention with particular focus on the role of the entrepreneur, networks, systems, institutions, and cross-sectoral partnerships. Based on the findings of the review, the authors synthesize formerly dispersed fields of research into an analytical framework, signposting a “systems of innovation” approach for future studies of social innovation and social entrepreneurship.

New voice, same story? Social entrepreneurship and active social capital formation

The development of the third sector in Australia has involved the negotiation of varying forms of state and market regulatory mechanisms. In the course of these settlements, ground-up initiatives have often found that authenticity is only the starting point on journeys that end in incorporation. Social entrepreneurship is an emerging set of ideas which attempts to hold on to the authentic and unique elements generated by grassroots actions. What are its chances of success? This article sets out to answer this question through a discussion of regulation and social capital. A four-fold model of social cap ita I formation is advanced which outlines 'defensive', 'consolidative', 'inclusive' and 'regulated' social capital. It is concluded that while social entrepreneurship has the potential to shift social capital formation from reactive to active forms, it is likely to become increasingly standardised and regulated.

Social entrepreneurship and experiential learning

Social entrepreneurship is a growing, but currently ill-defined area of innovation and business development. It is about accountability not just to commercial imperatives but to the wide range of stakeholders in a social enterprise, potentially an area of great tension. Social responsibility is about a commitment to society, entrepreneurship is usually understood to provide a business outlook on the enterprise – it needs to be sustainable commercially.

To educate the modern or millennial learner (born after about 1980 and grappling with burgeoning youth needs for creative employment development) into developing a small to medium enterprise with a social responsibility, modern postgraduate coursework programs have looked closely at experiential learning. This provides a performative learning through transforming theory into applied situations. The workplace based projects used for the postgraduate programs are effective immersive learning. This paper will include a case study of two postgraduate coursework units New Ventures in Creative Enterprise, and Building Creative Teams, part of a Masters in Communication/Creative Enterprise. These provide experiential learning about strategic planning for startup creative businesses, and work-based projects which build on interpersonal skills for ongoing success.