Eine Vermessung der Landschaft deutscher Sozialunternehmen

Spiess-Knafl, Wolfgang; Schües, Rieke; Richter, Saskia; Scheuerle, Thomas; Schmitz, Björn

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-01074-4_1

Cited by 17 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, there are few underdeveloped fields. Surveys indicate that social organizations active in Europe are more likely to serve specific focus groups, namely people with integration and inclusion needs (Social Enterprise UK 2011;Spiess-Knafl et al 2013).…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the significant constant reflecting the excluded variable for the "Education + Employability" field has a slight positive effect, which most likely arises because the income generation in this field occurs in the future rather than in the present. Because of venture philanthropy funds' need for income generation, the beneficiary field of investees is an important characteristic that limits the array of opportunities for venture philanthropy funds (Responsible Research 2011;Social Enterprise UK 2011;Spiess-Knafl et al 2013).…”

Section: Journal Of Sustainable Finance and Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding mechanisms in the social investment market: what are venture philanthropy funds financing and how?

Spiess-Knafl

Aschari-Lincoln

2015

Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal Of Sustainable Finance and Investmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding mechanisms in the social investment market: what are venture philanthropy funds financing and how?

Spiess-Knafl

Aschari-Lincoln

2015

Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Due to the nascent state of the field, interviews were highly explorative in nature, semi-structured and based on -A set of standard core questions formulated in a rather open way to stimulate discussion about recurrent themes in the literature (business model of investees, sources of income, trading history, finance mix experiences with acquiring investment capital, investment readiness), particularly drawing on results from the so far still limited previous empirical work on social entrepreneurship in Germany (Jansen et al 2013;Spiess-Knafl et al 2013) -and an individual set of additional questions (Gläser and Laudel 2009;Kleemann et al 2009) to allow dealing with interviewees' specifics and issues emerging in the course of the discussion, as some answers demanded further exploration. This required improvisation of additional questions on the spot and thus a less rigorous approach, but it allowed identifying and discussing barriers which had remained relatively unnoticed by previous research.…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Impact Investing in Germany: Current Impediments from Investors’ and Social Entrepreneurs’ Perspectives

Glänzel

Scheuerle

2015

Voluntas

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper provides empirical evidence on impediments of the emerging social impact investment field in Germany. The study is based on 19 in-depth interviews with social impact investing funds, investment advisors, and social entrepreneurs as investees. It takes an explorative approach because of the nascent stage of research on the subject. By systematically relating the perspectives of the actors involved, the study gives a broad empirical picture on the major challenges for social impact investing in Germany. Results reveal nine critical problem areas we have arranged along three dimensions: financial returns, social returns, and relationships and infrastructure. They comprise investors' and social entrepreneurs' practices, institutional settings which are still heavily influenced by peculiarities of the German welfare systems, as well as undeveloped framework conditions in the social investment market. By interpreting the results through a lens of conflicting institutional logics, we further contribute to this research stream by showcasing social impact investing as a core area of friction between the logics of the market and civil society.Résumé Cet article avance des données empiriques sur les obstacles au domaine émergent de l'investissement à impact social en Allemagne. L'étude repose sur 19 entretiens approfondis réalisés avec des fonds d'investissement à impact social, des conseillers en placement et des entrepreneurs sociaux en tant qu'investisseurs. Elle inclut une approche exploratoire en raison du stade embryonnaire des recherches sur le sujet. En reliant systématiquement les points de vue des acteurs concernés, l'étude offre une idée générale empirique des principaux défis pour l'investissement & Gunnar Glänzel à impact social en Allemagne. Les résultats révèlent neuf problèmes essentiels que nous avons présentés selon trois dimensions: les retombées financières, les retombées sociales, et les relations et les infrastructures. Ils comprennent les pratiques des investisseurs et des entrepreneurs sociaux, les cadres institutionnels qui sont encore fortement influencés par les particularités du système de sécurité sociale allemand, ainsi que les conditions-cadres peu développées dans le marché de l'investissement social. En interprétant les résultats dans la perspective des logiques institutionnelles contradictoires, nous contribuons, d'autre part, à ce courant de recherche en montrant l'investissement à impact social en tant que domaine central de friction entre les logiques du marché et la société civile.Zusammenfassung Der Artikel fasst empirische Ergebnisse einer Studie zu Hemmnissen für den noch jungen Social-Impact-Investment-Markt in Deutschland zusammen. Die Studie beruht auf 19 detaillierten Interviews mit Social-ImpactInvestment-Fonds, Intermediären sowie Sozialunternehmen als Empfänger der Investitionen. Da sich die Forschung zu diesem Thema noch in den Anfängen befindet, wurde in der Studie ein stark explorativer Ansatz gewählt. Indem die Perspektiven der involvierten Akteure zueinander in ...

show abstract

“…Таковых оказалось почти 38 %. Для почти 21 % ведущим мотивом стало понимание общественной важности этой работы, а личные проблемы или трудности у ближайших родственников стали мотиватором для 15 и 16 % опрошенных соответственно [6].…”

Section: социальное предпринимательство как предмет социологического unclassified

Social Entrepreneurship as a Subject of Sociological Analysis

2018

Vestn. Permsk. nac. issled. politeh. univ., Soc.-èkon. nauki

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eine Vermessung der Landschaft deutscher Sozialunternehmen

Cited by 17 publications

References 18 publications

Understanding mechanisms in the social investment market: what are venture philanthropy funds financing and how?

Understanding mechanisms in the social investment market: what are venture philanthropy funds financing and how?

Social Impact Investing in Germany: Current Impediments from Investors’ and Social Entrepreneurs’ Perspectives

Social Entrepreneurship as a Subject of Sociological Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About