Competitive advantages as a foundation for social advantage: The role of social enterprise in regional development

The belief that regions play a role in determining national economic development and that advantages are found at the local and regional level has been the focus of economic geography and development studies over the last 10 years. However, this issue has historically been dominated by economic perspectives, industrial firms, and public bodies. In recent years the social economy is starting to receive greater attention in creating regional advantage as well as ameliorating regional disadvantage. The social economy includes the impact of the third sector such as social enterprises. This paper proposes that understanding the role and function of social enterprise will enable a more nuanced understanding of the socio-economic aspects of regional development. Drawing upon Oliver’s (1997) framework for sustainable competitive advantage it is argued that this established management framework provides a valuable foundation for examining the organisational resources that social enterprise need to operate effectively, as well as the socio-economic resources they produce for regional communities.

Social innovation and social enterprise : evidence from Australia

‘Social innovation’ is a construct increasingly used to explain the practices, processes and actors through which sustained positive transformation occurs in the network society (Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., Sander, B. (2007). Social innovation: What it is, why it matters and how can it be accelerated. Oxford:Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship; Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4):34–43, 2008.). Social innovation has been defined as a “novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient, sustainable, or just than existing solutions, and for which the value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than private individuals.” (Phills,J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6 (4):34–43, 2008: 34.) Emergent ideas of social innovation challenge some traditional understandings of the nature and role of the Third Sector, as well as shining a light on those enterprises within the social economy that configure resources in novel ways. In this context, social enterprises – which provide a social or community benefit and trade to fulfil their mission – have attracted considerable policy attention as one source of social innovation within a wider field of action (see Leadbeater, C. (2007). ‘Social enterprise and social innovation: Strategies for the next 10 years’, Cabinet office,Office of the third sector http://www.charlesleadbeater.net/cms xstandard/social_enterprise_innovation.pdf. Last accessed 19/5/2011.). And yet, while social enterprise seems to have gained some symbolic traction in society, there is to date relatively limited evidence of its real world impacts.(Dart, R. Not for Profit Management and Leadership, 14(4):411–424, 2004.) In other words, we do not know much about the social innovation capabilities and effects of social enterprise. In this chapter, we consider the social innovation practices of social enterprise, drawing on Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., Sander, B. (2007). Social innovation: What it is, why it matters and how can it be accelerated. Oxford: Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship: 5) three dimensions of social innovation: new combinations or hybrids of existing elements; cutting across organisational, sectoral and disciplinary boundaries; and leaving behind compelling new relationships. Based on a detailed survey of 365 Australian social enterprises, we examine their self-reported business and mission-related innovations, the ways in which they configure and access resources and the practices through which they diffuse innovation in support of their mission. We then consider how these findings inform our understanding of the social innovation capabilities and effects of social enterprise,and their implications for public policy development.

Social procurement and its implications for social enterprise : a literature review [Working Paper No. CPNS48]

This paper reviews the available academic and policy literature to identify the possibilities and limitations of social procurement, and the factors that enable its implementation. In doing so, it aims to contribute to an evidence-based approach to social enterprise development in Australia, and to provide practical information of use to both policy makers and social enterprises considering social procurement arrangements. Based on the available evidence, the dominant focus of this review is on social procurement by governments.

Changing the rules in use? An examination of social enterprise in local governance

As multi-stakeholder entities that explicitly inhabit both social and economic domains, social enterprises pose new challenges and possibilities for local governance. In this paper, we draw on new institutional theory to examine the ways in which locally-focused social enterprises disrupt path dependencies and rules in use within local government. Rather than examining the more commonly asked question of the influence of the state on social enterprise, our purpose here is to examine the impacts of social enterprise on governmental institutions at the local level. Our discussion is based on a mixed-methods study, including an online survey of 66 local government staff, document analysis, and in-depth interviews with 24 social enterprise practitioners and local government actors working to support social enterprise development in Victoria, Australia. We find that, in some instances, the hybrid nature of social enterprise facilitates ‘joining up’ between different functional areas of local government. Beyond organisational relationships, social enterprise also influences local governance through the reinterpretation and regeneration of institutionalised public spaces.

Finding Australia's social enterprise sector : final report

The forms social enterprises can take and the industries they operate in are so many and various that it has always been a challenge to define, find and count social enterprises. In 2009 Social Traders partnered with the Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies (ACPNS) at Queensland University of Technology to define social enterprise and, for the first time in Australia, to identify and map the social enterprise sector: its scope, its variety of forms, its reasons for trading, its financial dimensions, and the individuals and communities social enterprises aim to benefit.

Mapping social enterprise in Australia : conceptual debates and their operational implications

In the last ten years, there has been growing interest in social enterprise by governments, the not for profit sector and philanthropy in Australia The drivers of this interest have been variously understood to be: increasing demands for innovative responses to social and environmental problems; pressures on non-profit organisations to diversify their income sources; and increasing emphases by government on the role of civil society actors in partnering around social policy agendas. Whatever its genesis, very little is known about the scale and scope of the emerging social enterprise sector. In order to research the scope of the sector, an important first step involves understanding just what social enterprise is, and how it may be operationalised. This paper presents the findings from the first stage of a national research project conducted by the authors in conjunction with a new social enterprise development company. The purpose of the project was to provide a comprehensive snapshot of the social enterprise sector in Australia. In this paper, we focus on the definitional debates arising from our workshop discussions, what these mean for understanding contemporary discourses of social enterprise, and their implications for research, policy and practice.

Pathways to employment for migrants and refugees? The case of social enterprise

This paper examines the use of social enterprise – that is, not for personal profit businesses that have a strong social purpose- to support training and employment pathways for migrants and refugees facing multiple forms of exclusion. Drawing on an evaluation of a program that supports seven social enterprises in the Australian state of Victoria, the study finds that social enterprise affords unique local opportunities for economic and social participation for the program’s participants. Nevertheless, there are limits to the impacts of programs that mediate transitions within an increasingly flexible labour market without redressing the broader social determinants of labour market segmentation.

Social enterprise and regional development : a pilot study

This preliminary study is an early attempt to explicitly explore the role of social enterprises in regional development. Focusing on North West Tasmania, an isolated and predominately rural region, this study examines three social enterprises based in the region and the nature of their social and economic impacts.

Fostering wellbeing of immigrants and refugees? Evaluating the outcomes of work integration social enterprise

Work integration social enterprises (WISE) seek to create employment and pathways to employment for those highly disadvantaged in the labour market. This chapter examines the effects of WISE on the wellbeing of immigrants and refugees experiencing multiple barriers to economic and social participation. Drawing on an evaluation of a programme that supports seven such enterprises in the Australian state of Victoria, the effects of involvement for individual participants and their communities are examined. The study finds that this social enterprise model affords unique local opportunities for economic and social participation for groups experiencing significant barriers to meaningful employment. These opportunities have a positive impact on individual and community-level wellbeing. However, the financial costs of the model are high relative to other employment programmes, which is consistent with international findings on intermediate labour market programmes. The productivity costs of WISE are also disproportionately high compared to private sector competitors in some industries. This raises considerable dilemmas for social enterprise operators seeking to produce social value and achieve business sustainability while bearing high productivity costs to fulfil their mission. Further, the evaluation illuminates an ongoing need to address the systemic and structural drivers of health and labour market inequalities that characterize socio-economic participation for immigrants and refugees.

The relationship of entrepreneurial orientation, Vincentian values and economic and social performance in social enterprise

This study focuses on the managerial question “should social enterprises become more entrepreneurial?” It adapts the Covin and Slevin (1989) entrepreneurial orientation scale to measure the adoption of entrepreneurship by a social enterprise, and develops a scale that combines a Vincentian based focus to serve the poor with a propensity to take a more entrepreneurial approach toward business as a measure of a social value orientation (SVO).

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.

Measurement as legitimacy versus legitimacy of measures : Performance evaluation of social enterprise

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review the growing emphasis on quantifiable performance measures such as social return on investment (SROI) in third sector organisations – specifically, social enterprise – through a legitimacy theory lens. It then examines what social enterprises value (i.e. consider important) in terms of performance evaluation, using a case study approach. Design/methodology/approach Case studies involving interviews, documentary analysis, and observation, of three social enterprises at different life-cycle stages with different funding structures, were constructed to consider “what measures matter” from a practitioner's perspective. Findings Findings highlight a priority on quality outcomes and impacts in primarily qualitative terms to evaluate performance. Further, there is a noticeable lack of emphasis on financial measures other than basic access to financial resources to continue pursuing social goals. Social implications The practical challenges faced by social enterprises – many of which are small to medium sized – in evaluating performance and by implication organisational legitimacy are contrasted with measures such as SROI which are resource intensive and have inherent methodological limitations. Hence, findings suggest the limited and valuable resources of social enterprises would be better allocated towards documenting the actual outcomes and impacts as a first step, in order to evaluate social and financial performance in terms appropriate to each objective, in order to demonstrate organisational legitimacy. Originality/value Findings distinguish between processes which may hold symbolic legitimacy for select stakeholder groups, and processes which hold substantive, cognitive legitimacy for stakeholders more broadly, in the under-researched context of social enterprise.