Making sense of social enterprise

Seanor, Pam; Meaton, Julia

doi:10.1108/17508610780000724

Cited by 55 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These values exert a powerful influence over organizational sense-making, identification, and shape strategy and action (Golden-Biddle and Rao 1997;Scott and Lane 2000;Seanor and Meaton 2007). Yet there also exist tensions, relating to stakeholder representation on governance structures (i.e., the board), and how this portrays a collective identity at the top organizational level (belonging paradox).…”

Section: Paradoxes and Social Enterprise Governancementioning

confidence: 96%

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

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores how fair trade social enterprises (FTSEs) manage paradoxes in stakeholder-oriented governance models. We use narrative accounts from board members, at governance events and board documents to report an exploratory study of paradoxes in three FTSEs which are partly farmer-owned. Having synthesized the key social enterprise governance literature and framed it alongside the broader paradox theory, we used narratives to explore how tensions are articulated, how they can be applied within an adapted paradox framework, and how governance actors seek to mitigate paradoxes. The paper contributes to current debates in social enterprise scholarship concerning hybridity (Pache and Santos, Acad Manag Rev 35 (3):455-476, 2010; in Institutional logics in action, Part B (Research in the sociology of organizations), 2012), hybrid organizing (Battilana and Lee, Acad Manag Ann 8(1):397-441, 2014) and operational tensions (Smith et al., Bus Eth Q 23(3):407-442, 2013) by illustrating empirically how the central social/enterprise paradox manifests in FTSEs governance arrangements. We build on the paradox categories proposed by Lüscher and Lewis (Acad Manag J 51(2):221-240, 2008) and adapted in Smith et al. (Bus Eth Q 23 (3):407-442, 2013) by developing a recursive model of legitimacy-seeking governance processes, conceptualizing how boards seek to mitigate, but not necessarily resolve, paradoxes.

show abstract

Section: Paradoxes and Social Enterprise Governancementioning

confidence: 96%

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

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other supply side of the equation, the capacity to meet these needs will be dependent upon the ability of the local populace (or incomers working on their behalf) to develop business skills and financial resources. Key individuals are often portrayed as the driving force behind SEs, and although such individuals are often crucial, these firms are rarely the product of the lone actions of a single ‘heroic’ individual (Seanor and Meaton 2007; Amin 2009); in addition, networks and infrastructural support are vital (Peattie and Morley 2006; Phillips 2006; Sharir and Lerner 2006; Thompson and Doherty 2006; Hynes 2009). Since SEs require such cooperation and voluntary activity to operate, one might expect them to flourish in areas with strong degrees of social capital (i.e.…”

Section: Conceptualising the Geography Of Social Enterprisementioning

confidence: 99%

The enigmatic regional geography of social enterprise in the UK: a conceptual framework and synthesis of the evidence

Buckingham

Pinch²,

Sunley³

2011

Area

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social enterprise (SE) has attracted increasing attention from policymakers, practitioners and academics over recent years and it has often been argued that there is a strong geographical dimension to social enterprise growth. However, a lack of reliable and extensive quantitative data about these organisations has prevented any rigorous analysis of their geographical distribution. This paper offers an exploratory theoretical framework for understanding the causes of geographical variations in SE, focusing on the relations between capacities/resources and demand. It then examines what can be learned from existing national surveys about the regional geography of SE. It is argued that these datasets are difficult to compare because of their different sampling frames, and in most cases the regional findings are only provisional and indicative. However, when considered in concert, some consistent themes emerge: London, for example, has a disproportionately high share of SE activity, as to a lesser extent do the South West and North East regions. It is concluded that regional populations of SEs are the product of often countervailing forces in supply and demand that act to level out the degree of regional variations. These totals are also likely to mask significant differences in their characteristics in different places and more pronounced spatial variations at smaller spatial scales (e.g. between inner city, suburban and rural areas). Figure 1 A diagrammatic representation of the interaction of supply and demand factors affecting the regional geography of social enterprise in the UKThe enigmatic regional geography of social enterprise 85

show abstract

“…Here, the terms social enterprise, social entrepreneur, social entrepreneurship, are often used interchangeably (Seanor and Meaton, 2007). Less emphasis is given to the social goal.…”

Section: Defining the Concept Of Social Enterprisementioning

confidence: 99%

Social enterprises for development asbuen vivir

Giovannini

2012

Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual overview of linkages between buen vivir and social enterprise as emerging from a review of the literature regarding indigenous development approaches in Latin America. As reported in the literature such approaches aim to reduce poverty and affirm indigenous cultural identities through the sustainable use of natural resources. Design/methodology/approach -The conceptual arguments build on a review of literature regarding social enterprise, mainly in its European conception, on social and solidarity economy according to several Latin American scholars, and on streams of literature related to indigenous development and indigenous entrepreneurship. Findings -Against the failure of externally-driven developmental policies, social enterprise can be considered as a useful vehicle for indigenous peoples to establish direct control and management of natural resources and territories that constitute an important step towards their self-determination and self-managed development.Research limitations/implications -An empirical validation of the presented argument is lacking in this paper and further empirical work is needed. Originality/value -The paper is an attempt to provide a general conceptualization of social enterprise as a meaningful tool for the development of indigenous peoples in Latin America, bringing together different concepts borrowed from theories on social enterprise, social and solidarity economy and indigenous development.

show abstract

Making sense of social enterprise

Cited by 55 publications

References 3 publications

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

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

The enigmatic regional geography of social enterprise in the UK: a conceptual framework and synthesis of the evidence

Social enterprises for development asbuen vivir

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About