Social enterprise as a socially rational business

Abstract

Purpose: This paper examines the discourses that influence policy and practice in social enterprises. In institutional circles, arguments are shaped by the desire to protect assets for the community, while entrepreneurial discourses favour a mixture of investment sources, surplus sharing and inclusive systems of governance. A critique is outlined that challenges policy-makers and academics to move beyond the heated debate on "business-like" activity through a deeper understanding of the social relations entered into (and created by) different social entrepreneurial activities.Design/Methodology/Approach: The paper is wholly theoretical. Firstly, contradictions are exposed through a review of practitioner and scholarly literature. Thereafter, empirically grounded studies are used to develop a theoretical model that accommodates and accounts for diverse practices. A broader perspective, that views human behaviour as a product of, and support system for, our socio-sexual choices, is deployed to extend understanding of social capital. By integrating this into governance theory, workplaces come to be seen as complex centres of community-building replete with economic and social goals. The concept of "social rationality" is elaborated as an alternative way to understand the legitimacy of social entrepreneurial activity and management practice.Originality/Value: The paper concludes by developing a framework and typology that theorises social enterprise as a heterogeneous business movement. Each form of social enterprise integrates socially rational thinking into its policies and practices. This suggests a different educational agenda for social entrepreneurs oriented towards the equitable distribution, and not accumulation, of social and economic capital.

Evaluating Conflict between Employees: Exploring the Costs to an Organization

“…Etzioni and Friedman were used as the basis for additional investigations regarding the actions of people in organizations and how they made decisions in relation to conflicts with others (as cited in Ridley-Duff, 2008). Today, much of the focus of conflict management research is on bullying and traumatic events in the workplace (Lutgen-Sandvik, 2008).…”

Introduction

“…Although a social enterprise is generally conceptualised as an organisation that trades for social purposes, contemporary research, literature and policy all highlight diffi culty of defi nition (Haugh & Kitson, 2007;Nicholls & Cho, 2008;Ridley-Duff , 2008;Townsend & Hart, 2008;Neck et al, 2009). In its widest sense, social enterprise embraces the gamut of social economy organisations engaged in trading activities including community enterprises, social fi rms, social businesses, mutuals, fair trade companies and voluntary organisations that trade (Pearce, 2003).…”

An exploratory study on the potential of social enterprise to act as the institutional glue of network governance

“…There are some similarities in the social enterprise debates, as despite the existence of research that seeks to stress the cross-sectoral nature of social enterprise (Defourny, 2001;Nyssens, 2006;Ridley-Duff, 2008;Ridley-Duff & Bull, 2011), there is a tendency within the literature to emphasize one of the spectrums. In the international context, beyond a general agreement concerning the pursuit of social goals, there is no agreed upon definition of social enterprise.…”