Bringing the Family Logic in: From Duality to Plurality in Social Enterprises

Abstract

Social enterprises combine activities, processes, structures, and meanings associated with multiple institutional logics that may pose conflicting goals, norms, values, and practices. This in-depth multi-source case study of an ecological social enterprise in Malaysia reveals how the enactment of the family logic interacts with the market and ecological logics not only in conflicting but also in synergetic ways. By drawing attention to the institutional logic of the family in social entrepreneurship, this study highlights the heterogeneity of social enterprises. The findings have implications for research with social enterprises and family-owned firms in relation to the ethical obligations of these organizations and the interactions of multiple logics.

Working For Impact, But Failing to Experience It: Exploring Individuals’ Sensemaking in Social Enterprises

“…Yet research in organizational behavior shows that individuals experience work as impactful when they encounter consistent, frequent, and durable cues that visualize the positive impact (Grant et al, 2007; Sonnentag & Starzyk, 2015). Second, as social enterprises take action toward catalyzing positive societal change, they also face difficult ethical challenges (Bhatt, 2022; Drencheva & Au, 2022; Hota et al, 2023; Sengupta & Lehtimäki, 2022) and social justice questions (Kimmitt & Muñoz, 2018), such as the trade-offs between creating income-generating opportunities for marginalized communities and exposure to human trafficking risks (Au et al, 2022). As members of social enterprises acknowledge these ethical challenges and the potential exclusion created through their work, they may question if their work makes a difference.…”

Spatial and temporal characteristics, spatial clustering and governance strategies for regional development of social enterprises in China

“…Judging from the data on social enterprise certification, it is mainly concentrated in Beijing, Sichuan and Guangzhou. The spatial and temporal differences of social enterprises are the result of the interplay between organizations and institutional environments, and the existing research mainly focuses on individual characteristics and institutional environment perspectives [ 4 , 5 ].…”