Social Entrepreneurship betweenCross-Currents: Toward a Framework for Theoretical Restructuring of the Field

Abstract

Scholars have characterized social entrepreneurship as an “accumulative fragmentalism,” primarily characterized by the use of case studies featuring prominent and innovative profiles of social enterprises and entrepreneurs. However, today, social entrepreneurship is between cross‐currents. On the one hand, it seeks, as a subfield, to solidify its theoretical and methodological underpinnings and standpoints. On the other hand, it is consistently exposed to field expansion, given that a number of its underlying frameworks, commonly shared with other fields (such as sustainability and corporate social responsibility [CSR]), are opening up to wider vistas of conceptualization and theorization. This is often through the influence of practice as well as theory. The contribution of the paper is threefold. First, it enhances our understanding of social entrepreneurship field development by identifying cross‐currents and by highlighting new angles for paradigmatic and theoretical positioning. Second, it implements a framework that scholars previously employed within the original field of entrepreneurship (Bourdieu's theory of capitals and their transformations); in doing so, it also proceeds to propose an enrichment to the framework by including additional capitals that are specifically relevant for the field of social entrepreneurship and that are influenced by common agendas, as those exist in the fields of sustainability and CSR. Third, it offers insights for theory, as well as practice, which relate to understandings from the first two contributions.

Constituents and Characteristics of Hybrid Businesses: A Qualitative, Empirical Framework

“…However, what constitutes a hybrid business on a deeper level in terms of an overarching definition has only recently received some attention. Knowledge about organizational hybridity is still in a pre‐paradigmatic stage (Nicholls ) and, therefore, rather fragmented, often focusing on isolated issues and anecdotal descriptions (Nicolopoulou ). The present paper will present these descriptions and issues to build a preliminary groundwork for understanding the nature of hybrid businesses.…”

An incubation perspective on social innovation: the London Hub – a social incubator

“…Zahra et al (, p. 519) have proposed a definition that places entrepreneurship at the core of that process: ‘Social entrepreneurship encompasses the activities and processes undertaken to discover, define, and exploit opportunities in order to enhance social wealth by creating new ventures or managing existing organizations in an innovative manner’. Social entrepreneurship is characterised by the concept of triple or ‘multiple’ bottom lines, which appear to circumscribe social enterprises in a different light from economic enterprises (Chell, ; Chell et al, ; Nicolopoulou, ) suggesting, at the same time, greater complexity at the managerial level for ensuring sustainability and growth (Lucas et al, ; Nicolopoulou et al, ). The trend for social entrepreneurship has already attracted significant interest in the last decade from scholars, who have been exploring the topic at various levels, including ways in which such multiple (and possibly conflicting) bottom lines are involved in its processes, as well as operationalising those at the level of strategy, leadership, structure and governance.…”

Entrepreneurial Narratives in Sustainable Venturing: Beyond People, Profit, and Planet

“…Most of our collective inquiry has relied on the definition of sustainable development provided by the UN's Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland ), which considers the latter to be development that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland , p. 8). Consequently, scholars have relied on the idea that the central drive of sustainable entrepreneurial behavior is the pursuit of triple bottom line ventures (Hall, Daneke, and Lenox ; Nicolopoulou ), meaning that achieving economic, environmental, and social outcomes concurrently is their key aim, and final outcome. So far, sustainable entrepreneurship literature has used the latter to support the distinctiveness of the phenomenon, as the argument seems to be sufficient in itself to extend the purpose and logic of traditional entrepreneurial behavior.…”