No abstract

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.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present an Australian case study and to explore how social enterprises may be conceptualised as spaces of well-being, that is the ways in which social enterprises, not explicitly delivering health services, may be producing health and well-being benefits for those who come into contact with them. Design/methodology/approach – A case study in Australia is used to explore in depth the mechanisms of well-being production. Data were collected using ethnographic observation, focus groups and walking interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, GIS and the lens of therapeutic assemblage. Findings – The case study social enterprise produces well-being as integration, capability, security and therapy. The social enterprise acts as a therapeutic assemblage with well-being “spoken”, “practiced” and “felt” within the social enterprise. The ways in which well-being is generated are often linked to the productive element of enterprise – and have the potential to contribute to tackling several contemporary health challenges and inequalities relating to, for example, a lack of physical activity and levels of social isolation. Research limitations/implications – This paper draws on a single Australian case study but points to the need for further in-depth work in the area of social enterprise and health. Originality/value – The paper advances our understanding of how social enterprises may be linked to health and well-being. It goes beyond quantification of, for example, number of clients helped, to consider the wider experience of well-being for those who come into contact with social enterprises.

In recent years, the imperative to communicate organisational impacts to a variety of stakeholders has gained increasing importance within all sectors. Despite growing external demands for evaluation and social impact measurement, there has been limited critically informed analysis about the presumed importance of these activities to organisational success and the practical challenges faced by organisations in undertaking such assessment. In this paper, we present the findings from an action research study of five Australian small to medium social enterprises' practices and use of evaluation and social impact analysis. Our findings have implications for social enterprise operators, policy makers and social investors regarding when, why and at what level these activities contribute to organisational performance and the fulfilment of mission.

Purpose This paper aims to explore the well-being impacts of social enterprise, beyond a social enterprise per se, in everyday community life. Design/methodology/approach An exploratory case study was used. The study’s underpinning theory is from relational geography, including Spaces of Wellbeing Theory and therapeutic assemblage. These theories underpin data collection methods. Nine social enterprise participants were engaged in mental mapping and walking interviews. Four other informants with “boundary-spanning” roles involving knowledge of the social enterprise and the community were interviewed. Data were managed using NVivo, and analysed thematically. Findings Well-being realised from “being inside” a social enterprise organisation was further developed for participants, in the community, through positive interactions with people, material objects, stories and performances of well-being that occurred in everyday community life. Boundary spanning community members had roles in referring participants to social enterprise, mediating between participants and structures of community life and normalising social enterprise in the community. They also gained benefit from social enterprise involvement. Originality/value This paper uses relational geography and aligned methods to reveal the intricate connections between social enterprise and well-being realisation in community life. There is potential to pursue this research on a larger scale to provide needed evidence about how well-being is realised in social enterprises and then extends into communities.

No abstract

The role of social innovations in transforming the lives of individuals and communities has been a source of popular attention in recent years. This article systematically reviews the available evidence of the relationship between social innovation and its promotion of health equity. Guided by Fair Foundations: The VicHealth framework for health equity and examining four types of social innovation--social movements, service-related social innovations, social enterprise and digital social innovations--we find a growing literature on social innovation activities, but inconsistent evaluative evidence of their impacts on health equities, particularly at the socio-economic, political and cultural level of the framework. Distinctive characteristics of social innovations related to the promotion of health equity include the mobilization of latent or unrealised value through new combinations of (social, cultural and material) resources; growing bridging social capital and purposeful approaches to linking individual knowledge and experience to institutional change. These have implications for health promotion practice and for research about social innovation and health equity.

No abstract