No abstract

Knowledge sharing is central to reducing inequality and alleviating poverty. However, communities in settings of extreme poverty are often bounded by distinct perspectives and understandings that hinder knowledge sharing. Furthermore, social fault lines may create internal boundaries that impede interaction, further complicating knowledge sharing. Despite these challenges, some knowledge sharing efforts are successful. The purpose of this study is to better understand how knowledge sharing overcomes boundaries in settings of extreme inequality and poverty. Using qualitative data from rural India, we find that boundary work performed by boundary spanners overcomes external and internal boundaries by creating space for action, observation, and reflection in the recipient community. These actions, or syncretizing mechanisms, transform newly introduced knowledge, which then facilitates further boundary work, resulting in community transformation. Under certain circumstances, we see how boundary work and syncretism can lead to significant knowledge and recipient transformation. Thus, we seek to contribute to the literature by more fully exploring the transformative power of knowledge sharing within contexts of extreme poverty, and by explaining the process by which it occurs.

While the past decade has produced a number of insights into the process of institutional change, scholars still lack a comprehensive understanding of the germinal stages of institutional entrepreneurship. More specifically, further knowledge is needed into what factors cause certain individuals to initiate norm-breaking behaviour while others continue to adhere to societal expectations. Prior work seeking to inform this question has focused either on individual-level or environmental-level explanations. Comparatively, we employ a social network perspective as a ‘meso-level’ lens into the space where actors and their environment intersect. Based upon our qualitative findings, we propose that social ties can serve as an important factor in enabling (heterophilic ties) as well as constraining (homophilic ties) institutional change. However, our data also suggest that these network forces are highly dynamic and contingent upon tie frequency, the sequencing of tie contact, and the prevailing social norms in which tie contact takes place.

There is, in general, a dearth of empirical inquiries on how institutional voids are filled through institutional work in marginalized communities. Extant studies have focussed on institutional work that addresses solitary institutional void, mostly in formal settings. In this paper, we inquire the case of a social entrepreneurial venture in India that identified two complementary institutional voids (productive ageing void of the urban elderly and rural education void of children) and attempted to simultaneously address the two voids. The issue of physical distance between the two groups was overcome by enacting an ICT platform. We also show how the institutional challenges associated with the ICT implementation led them to pursue different kinds of institutional works in their context. We then identify different theoretical dimensions of institutional works that could be used in marginalized contexts. Finally, we show how the 'complementary voids' approach has implications for both theory and practice.

This paper investigates how social enterprises navigate through the ethical complexity of social change and extends the ethical quandaries faced by social enterprises (SEs) beyond organisational boundaries. Building on the emerging literature on the ethics of SEs, I conceptualise ethics as an engagement with power relations. I develop theoretical arguments to understand the interaction between ethical predispositions of a SE and the normative structure of the social system in which it operates. I applied this conceptualisation in a hierarchical and heterogeneous rural Indian context to provide insights into the moral ambiguity of ethical decision-making and suggest pathways for ethical actions. Taking a qualitative case study approach, I followed an exemplary SE’s implementation process in India. I observed ethical challenges in designing the implementation process (efficiency versus equality), selecting the beneficiaries (fairness versus power) and sustaining the programme (cooperation versus autonomy). I also identified three actions of the SE—the action of recognition, the action of reposition and the action of collaboration—and developed a transformative process model. I discuss the theoretical implications of this research for SEs and recommend a critical engagement with ethical theories to address systemic problems.