Schools of Thought in the Field of Social Entrepreneurship

Social entrepreneurship is a new and exciting topic
that holds a great promise in helping alleviate the social problems of
the world. As a new subject, the meaning of the term is too broad and
this is counterproductive in trying to build understanding around the
concept. The purpose of this study is to identify and compare the
elements of social entrepreneurship as defined by seven international
organizations leading social entrepreneurship projects: Ashoka
Foundation, Skoll Foundation, Schwab Foundation and Yunus
Center; as well as from three other institutions fostering social
entrepreneurship: Global Social Benefit Institute, BRAC University,
and Socialab. The study used document analysis from Skoll
Foundation, Schwab Foundation, Yunus Center and Ashoka
Foundation; and open ended interview to experts from the Global
Social Benefit Institute at Santa Clara University in United States,
BRAC University from Bangladesh, and Socialab from Argentina.
The study identified three clearly differentiated schools of thought,
based on their views on revenue, scalability, replicability and
geographic location. While this study is by no means exhaustive, it
provides an indication of the patterns of ideas fostered by important
players in the field. By clearly identifying the similarities and
differences in the concept of social entrepreneurship, research and
practitioners are better equipped to build on the subject, and to
promote more adequate and accurate social policies to foster the
development of social entrepreneurship.

Authors:

• Cris Bravo

Keywords:

• Replicability
• revenue
• scalability
• schools of thought
• social entrepreneurship.

References:

[1] S.T. Certo and T. Miller, “Social Entrepreneurship: Key issues and
concepts,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol 51, no 4, pp 267-
271, Month, 2008.
[2] T.L. Hill, T.H Kothari and M. Shea, “Patterns of meaning in the social
entrepreneurship literature: a research platform,” Journal of Social
Entrepreneurship, vol 1, no 1, pp 5-31 2010
[3] A. Nicholls, “The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: reflexive
isomorphism in a preparadigmatic field,” Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, vol 34, no 4, pp 611-633, 2010.
[4] J. Weerawardena and G. S. Mort, “Investigating social entrepreneurship:
A multidimensional model,” Journal of World Business, vol 41, no 1, pp
21–35, 2006.
[5] J. Short, T.W. Moss and G. T. Lumpkin, “Research in Social
Entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities,” Strategic
entrepreneurship journal, vol 3, no. 2, pp 161-194, 2009.
[6] A.M. Peredo and M. McLean, “Social entrepreneurship: A critical
review of the concept”. Journal of World Business, vol 41, no 1, pp 56–
65, 2006.
[7] J. G. Dees and B. B. Anderson, “Framing a theory of social
entrepreneurship: Building on two schools of practice and thought”
Research on social entrepreneurship: Understanding and contributing
to an emerging field, vol 1 no 3, pp 39-66, 2006.
[8] J. Defourny and M. Nyssens, “Conceptions of Social Enterprise and
Social Entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences
and Divergences,” Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, vol 1, no 1, pp
32-53, 2010.
[9] B. Hoogendoorn, E. Pennings, and R. Thurik, (2010) “What Do We
Know About Social Entrepreneurship: An Analysis of Empirical
Research” Erasmus Research Institute of Management. Available:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1462018. (Accessed
March 1st, 2015)
[10] K. M. Eisenhardt, “Building theories from case study research,”
Academy of management review, vol 14, no 4, pp 532-550, 1989.
[11] Ashoka Foundation. (2015). (Online). Available:
https://www.ashoka.org/social_entrepreneur. (Accessed March 1st, 2015)
[12] Skoll Foundation. (2015). About. (Online). Available:
http://www.skollfoundation.org/about/. (Accessed March 1st, 2015)
[13] Schwab Foundation. (2015) About. (Online). Available:
http://www.schwabfound.org/content/about-us-0. (Accessed March 1st,
2015)
[14] Yunus Center. (n.d) Social Business. (Online). Available:
http://www.muhammadyunus.org/index.php/social-business/socialbusiness.
(Accessed March 1st, 2015)
[15] Global Social Benefit Institute. (2015). GSBI Programs. (Online).
Available: http://www.bracu.ac.bd/about. (Accessed March 14, 2015)
[16] BRAC University (n.d). About (Online). Available:
http://www.bracu.ac.bd/about. (Accessed March 14, 2015)
[17] Socialab. (2015). Socialab. (Online). Available:
http://socialab.com/paginas/ver/que-es. (Accessed March 14, 2015)
[18] T. Fitzgerald, “Documents and documentary analysis”. In Research
Methods in Educational Leadership and Management, A. Brigss, A. and
M. Coleman, Eds. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc,
2007, pp 278 – 294.
[19] M. Patton, Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed.
Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc., 2002.
[20] J. Saldaña, The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, 2nd ed.
London: Sage Publications. 2013.
[21] M. B. Miles and A. M. Huberman, Qualitative data analysis: An
expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 1994.
[22] C. McNaught, and P. Lam, “Using Wordle as a supplementary research
tool,” The qualitative report, vol 15, no 3, pp 630-643, 2010.
[23] R. Martin and S. Osberg, “Social Entrepreneurship: The case for
definition,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, vol 5, no 2, pp. 28-39.
2007.
[24] M. Yunus, “Creating a world without poverty: social business and the
future of capitalism,” Global Urban Development Magazine, vol 4, no 2,
pp. 16 – 41. 2008.
[25] Santiago Sena. General Director of Social Entrepreneurship.
Government of the city of Buenos Aires. Interview. April 27, 2015.
[26] Shamim Haque. Assistant Professor at Business School. BRAC
University. Interview. April 22, 2015.
[27] Keith Douglass Warner. Senior Director of Education and Action
Research. Miller Center for Social Entrepreneurship at Santa Clara
University. Interview. April 18, 2015.