Ambivalence and ambiguity in social enterprise; narratives about values in reconciling purpose and practices

Abstract

Alistair R Anderson*, Director, the Centre for Entrepreneurship, Aberdeen Business School, the Robert Gordon University, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen, AB 10 7QE, UK. *Corresponding author's e-mail address: a.r.anderson@rgu.ac.uk; telephone: +44 (0) 1224 3883; fax: +44 (0) 1224 263870 Abstract Social enterprises are unusual change organizations; typically their purpose is to bring about change to improve social well-being. Yet they do so in unusual ways. Traditional entrepreneurs generate social value as a by-product of economic value; whereas for social entrepreneurs the reverse is true. This brings about an ambiguity in integrating business and social well being, most manifest in identity and in managing the enterprise. Moreover, the values which drive social enterprise are "different". Consequently, we examine how values shape practices and how they give direction and purpose to what social enterprises do and how this shapes identity over time. Using the social organisation as the unit of analysis, we collected the narratives about tensions and how these were reconciled. We contribute by improving our understanding of social enterprise by showing how values are worked, used and deployed to give direction in reconciling ambiguity. Moreover, these ambiguities provide a unique identity and purpose for social enterprise.

A Fair Trade-off? Paradoxes in the Governance of Fair-trade Social Enterprises

“…While some insights have been gleaned from a re-working of corporate governance theories, there remains the prospect they do not satisfy the different missions and expectations that social enterprises have, for example their competing logics and the associated consequences (Diochon and Anderson 2011;Pache and Santos 2010). Social enterprise dual mission means that board members are simultaneously exposed to institutional pressures to achieve financial sustainability, generate social value and build and maintain close relationships with a range of stakeholder groups (Mason 2010).…”

Integrating normative values and/in value creation: A strategic management decision aid tool for social enterprises' values practices

“…For Mair and Marti (, p. 39), an SE's main focus “is on social value, while economic value creation is seen as a necessary condition to ensure financial viability.” Bellostas, López‐Arceiz and Mateos (, pp. 373–374), analyzing European sheltered workshops, pointed out that “the search for social value often comes first, and the economic value achieved is a consequence that derives from applying business strategies to achieve that social value.” Put differently, social entrepreneurs generate economic value as a by‐product of social value (Diochon & Anderson, ). The question remains as to if and how this value creation interacts with normative values.…”

Is it possible to measure social entrepreneurship in firms?

“…Consequently, a wide range of organisations mix non-profit and for-profit strategies (Fowler 2000;Diochon and Anderson 2011). Likewise, firms that primarily pursue profit may discover that customer service, attention to product quality and care for the environment are positively related to profit.…”

“…Given this study's novel aim of establishing a broad definition of SE, items were chosen to meet this aim without adhering literally to the items or definitions previously reviewed (Waddock and Graves 1997;Fowler 2000;Sagawa and Segal 2000;Neck et al 2009;Diochon and Anderson 2011). To measure broad SE, the scale uses the entrepreneurial and social dimensions cited by Peredo and McLean (2006) as components of SE.…”