How the social entrepreneurship business model designs in South Africa create value: a complex adaptive systems approach

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to understand social entrepreneurship (SE) business model design to create values whilst undertaking public service delivery within the complex environments of local governments in South Africa. Design/methodology/approach Face-to-face semi-structured interview was conducted with 15 purposively selected social entrepreneurs in Gauteng and Western Cape provinces. The interview guide consisted of main themes and follow-up questions. Themes included SEs’ general history, the social business model; challenges faced and how these were overcome; scaling and growth/survival strategies. These enabled the evaluation of SEs in terms of identifying key criteria of affordability, availability, awareness and acceptability, which SEs must achieve to operate successfully in low-income markets. Social enterprise owners/managers within the electricity distribution, water reticulation and waste management services sectors were surveyed. Findings Most respondents focus on building a network of trust with stakeholders, through communication mechanisms that emphasize high-frequency engagements. There is also a strong focus on design-thinking and customer-centric approaches that strengthen value creation. The value creation process used both product value and service value mechanisms and emphasized quality and excellence to provide stakeholder, as well as societal value, within their specific contexts. Practical implications This study builds upon other research that emphasizes SEs’ customer-centric approaches to strengthen value creation and on building a network of trust with multiple stakeholders. It contributes to emphasizing the business paradigm shift towards bringing social values to the business practice. Social implications Social good, but resource providers are demanding more concrete evidence to help them understand their impact (Struthers, 2013). This is because it is intrinsically difficult for many social organizations to document and communicate their impact in more than an anecdotal way. The research has contributed to the understanding of how SEs can provide evidence of value creation. Originality/value This study contributes to the understanding of how business models are designed to create value within the context of the overwhelming complexity of local government services in South Africa.

Social Entrepreneurship and Social Capital: A Review of Impact Research

“…Core societal problems are analyzed using the networks, values, and trust approach to building SEs. Here, the main themes analyzed are: (a) poverty [104][105][106][107]; (b) social change (divisions /cohesion/inclusion/solidarity) [108][109][110][111][112]; (c) human empowerment [113]; including women entrepreneurship [114][115][116] and indigenous entrepreneurship [117]; (d) community development [118][119][120][121][122][123][124][125][126][127][128][129][130][131][132][133]; (e) growth and wellbeing [134][135][136]; and (f) public goods such as water, electricity, waste management, safety, health, food, and so on [137][138][139][140][141][142][143][144][145][146][147][148].…”

Extending the Baldrige excellence model for managing community-based social enterprise

“…Various management excellence models provide frameworks for achieving organizational excellence. By adapting and aligning excellence models with sustainability principles, social enterprises can enhance their overall performance and impact Dalborg and von Friedrichs (2020), Akinboade, Taft, Weber, Manoko, and Molobi (2023) Source: Authors' own creation propose small iterations to accommodate institutional theory's present lack of alignment with performance excellence in social entrepreneurialism.…”

Removing barriers to plastic waste valorisation in Africa: Towards policies for value creation and capture in business ecosystems

“…Thus, these studies look inside out, whereas the policy studies look outside in. Examples are Godfrey et al (2017) who focused on the potential for cooperatives in de waste sector; Gall et al (2020) about the integration of informal sector waste pickers; Akinboade et al (2012) about value creation through social business models; Barnes et al (2021) on the potential for buy‐back centres in connecting formal and informal actors; and Kolade et al (2022) with a focus on digital innovators. The findings and recommendations from these studies often fall short in addressing the current challenges.…”

“…An expanded understanding of why plastic waste valorisation has not emerged as expected in LMICs, despite policy interventions, and practical guidance on how to address this, can empower policy makers, practitioners and entrepreneurs to create transformative change.Although some of the challenges towards plastic waste valorisation have been identified in prior literature (e.g., limited informal sector integration byAkinboade et al (2012), local authority's resource constraints byBauer (2020), challenges in aggregators' business modelsBarnes et al (2021), our study is able to identify how individual actor's barriers interact and create a low-value trap for the system actors collectively, distinguishing cause and effect, and showing the (limited) effect of existing policy has on this trap. Our study underlines the crucial function of governmental actors as regulators and business enablers in the plastic waste valorisation system.…”