Re‐assessing Schumpeterian assumptions regarding entrepreneurship and the social

Abstract

Purpose -In recent discussions on social entrepreneurship, there have been calls for the discipline to make better use of general theories of entrepreneurship. This article seeks to argue that while the literature may not be explicitly theoretical, it often draws upon taken-for-granted concepts inherited from Joseph Schumpeter. Design/methodology/approach -The text seeks to identify Schumpeterian assumptions within the social entrepreneurship literature, and introduce alternative perspectives on "the social" and "entrepreneurship", drawn from the social theory of Gabriel Tarde. These are then discussed in the context of the social entrepreneurial initiative Hand in Hand. Findings -The article identifies and re-assesses three assumptions: that of the social as container; that of capitalism-specific societal dynamism; and that of the atomistic, non-inventive entrepreneur. Originality/value -By re-imagining "the social" and "entrepreneurship" through the work of Tarde, the article suggests that scholars can develop new conceptualisations of social entrepreneurship.

The evolution of social entrepreneurship research: a bibliometric analysis

“…The studies regarding the personality of social entrepreneurs aimed to compare personal traits between social and commercial entrepreneurs. They found out that other than the traditional stereotyped vision of the heroic social entrepreneur, this group of people presented personality differences where the former have a stronger focus on hard work, are more solution and impact-oriented with significantly higher levels of creativity, risk-taking and need for autonomy than traditional entrepreneurs (Mauksch, 2012;Palmås, 2012;Smith and Bell, 2014;Chandra, 2016).…”

Social entrepreneurship – innovative challengers or adjustable followers?

“…Arguments for an innovative role stem from a focus on dynamic changes (Schumpeter, 1934) and a faith in the agency of individual actors (Dees, 2001), which many times is combined with the hope for a 'better world'. The literature on social entrepreneurship and (to a certain extent) that on social enterprises often draw upon these arguments as concepts that are taken for granted (Palmås, 2012). Additionally, the strength of institutions and structures are used to argue for a less innovative role for individual actors (Garud et al, 2007).…”

Social Enterprise in Mental Health: An Overview

“…An often-used term is social entrepreneurship. There is a contentious academic literature on the meaning of social entrepreneurship (Palmås, 2012;Swedberg, 2006Swedberg, , 2009; but, for the purposes of this article, a working definition is more appropriate. Entrepreneurs see opportunity where others do not and often are able to use resources in new ways to take advantage of those opportunities.…”