Bricolage and Social Entrepreneurship to Address Emergent Social Needs: A “Deconstructionist” Perspective

Zollo, Lamberto; Rialti, Riccardo; Ciappei, Cristiano; Boccardi, Andrea

doi:10.7341/20181422

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…What do successful entrepreneurs have in common? Such questions may have varied answers, but the common point is that there is no exception to the identification of entrepreneurial psychological capital ability that affects entrepreneurial success (Zollo et al, 2018). In addition to entrepreneurs, innovators have now become the object of strong national support, but compared to the process and the methods of innovation, the government or the enterprise attaches more importance to the results of innovation (Neumeyer et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploration and Analysis on the Psychological Capital of Entrepreneurship and the Deviant Innovation Behavior of Employees

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploration and Analysis on the Psychological Capital of Entrepreneurship and the Deviant Innovation Behavior of Employees

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand, this process includes a myriad of risks and often ends with deadlock. Empirical studies confirm that just a fraction of innovation activities lead to practical results and suggest that often private sector creativity (Zollo, Rialti, Ciappei, & Boccardi, 2018) and the size of the support by private enterprise is pivotal (Damijan, Kostevc, & Rojec, 2017).…”

Section: Literature Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 96%

R&D Expenditure and Innovation in the EU and Selected Member States

Pelikánová¹

2019

JEMI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development and competi ti veness cannot be achieved in our highly competi ti ve global society without innovati ons. Innovati ons are typically the result of a fi nancially demanding research process generati ng intellectual property assets, namely patented inventi ons or ideas for the digital setti ng and protected by copyright or otherwise. The EU is aware of it and its current strategy, Europe 2020, states that 3% of GDP should be allocated to R&D by 2020 at the latest and this should boost innovati on levels and make the EU a top global economic leader. Undoubtedly, innovati on is indispensable and needs to be fi nanced. However, the relati on of involved factors and the related dynamic are unclear and have not received suffi cient scienti fi c and academic att enti on. To make an initi al step to address this vacuum, three research questi ons are addressed. Firstly, what fracti on of GDP goes towards R&D, expressed by GERD, and what is the GERD trend in the EU and selected EU member states? Secondly, how many European patent applicati ons were fi led and patents granted, what was the success rate and how has digitalizati on been progressing in the EU and selected EU member states and what are the trends? Thirdly, can the possibility of a relati onship be implied? These three questi ons are answered based on multidisciplinary research employing hard data sources, such as Eurostat and EPO databases, offi cial and/or legislati ve documents, such as Europe 2020, academic literature along with direct observati on, fi eld search and the own experience of the author. Such a conglomerate of diversifi ed and multidisciplinary data is to be processed by a myriad of appropriately matching methods, both of a quanti tati ve and qualitati ve nature, and dominated by the holisti c Meta-Analysis. Indices and indicators, such as GERD, EPO stati sti cs and DESI, are comparati vely employed while observing their ti me evoluti on in the enti re EU and selected EU members. Their selecti on is made by the moti vati on to be representati ve and to face the (alleged) cliché about EU member states labeled as "good" (DE, FR), "lazy" PIGS

show abstract

“…Despite this rather strong language, the CSR sceptics are not delirious and selfish cormorants/gannets/graspers, because a number of empirical studies revealed the negative impacts of CSR activities and spending by indicating that CSR practices can become a powerful tool in the hand of the top management (MacGregor et al 2020), generate unnecessary costs, cripple financial results (Barnett 2007) and undermine the competitive advantage (Scherer and Palazzo 2011). This leads to a marketing, which undermines the strength of the information about inventiveness for stakeholders (Roszkowska-Menkes 2017) and about the creation and bringing of values to stakeholders (Zollo et al 2018). In contrast, such type of marketing is founded upon the conviction about the almost inevitable communication noise, inducement to information ignorance and resultant confusion of stakeholders, in particular consumers (Chauhan and Sagar 2021).…”

Section: Theoretical Background-the Carroll's Csr Pyramid Temple Believers and Heretics Before And During The Covid-19 Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

CSR Unconscious Consumption by Generation Z in the COVID-19 Era—Responsible Heretics Not Paying CSR Bonus?

Pelikánová

Hála

2021

JRFM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic brought a myriad of challenges and opportunities and has influenced the modern concept of sustainability as projected into the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the underlying multi-stakeholder model. The new generation of consumers, Generation Z, has progressively increased its participation in the market and its shopping trends have been impacting the entire CSR scenery. However, little is known about their attitudes, consumption preferences and expectations. In Spring 2021, this induced a pioneering case study survey involving members of Generation Z, students from a private university in Prague, focusing on their (lack of) readiness to pay any “CSR bonus”. The principal research aim was to study and understand the rather surprising unwillingness of a solvent part of the new generation of consumers to support CSR during the COVID-19 era by paying at least a symbolic CSR bonus. A formal survey involving a questionnaire, replied to by 228 students, out of which 18 totally rejected the CSR bonus, was assessed via contingency tables. It was accompanied by a complementary questioning via an informal interview and glossing. This plethora of data was processed by meta-analysis and lead to an unexpected proposition: prima facie sustainability heretics denying to pay any CSR bonus can be conscious consumers and responsible and progressive supporters of the sustainability and CSR. Their rejection is a deontological cry in a desert for more transparency, trust and the rule of law.

show abstract

Bricolage and Social Entrepreneurship to Address Emergent Social Needs: A “Deconstructionist” Perspective

Cited by 18 publications

References 68 publications

Exploration and Analysis on the Psychological Capital of Entrepreneurship and the Deviant Innovation Behavior of Employees

Exploration and Analysis on the Psychological Capital of Entrepreneurship and the Deviant Innovation Behavior of Employees

R&D Expenditure and Innovation in the EU and Selected Member States

CSR Unconscious Consumption by Generation Z in the COVID-19 Era—Responsible Heretics Not Paying CSR Bonus?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About