Exploring the drivers of tensions in social innovation management in the context of social entrepreneurial teams

Dufays, Frédéric

doi:10.1108/MD-01-2017-0089

Download

Article (Scientific journals)

Exploring the drivers of tensions in social innovation management in the context of social entrepreneurial teams

Dufays, Frédéric

2019 • In Management Decision, 57 (6), p. 1344-1361

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2268/262905

DOI
10.1108/MD-01-2017-0089

Files (1)Send to Details Statistics Bibliography Similar publications

Files

Full Text

Pre-print Tensions in SET - MD.pdf

Author postprint (441.47 kB)

Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to

RIS BibTex APA Chicago Permalink X Linkedin

Details

Keywords :

Tensions; Nascent social entrepreneurship; Paradox approach; Social entrepreneurial team; Social innovation management

Abstract :

[en] Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify tensions that are emerging in the invention and implementation of social innovation by social entrepreneurial teams and highlights elements that influence the type of tension encountered. Design/methodology/approach – Four cases are selected theoretically, studied individually, and compared to one another to identify tensions and patterns of tensions. Findings – The findings reveal the predominant tensions related to goals and identity during social innovation invention and those related to time and knowledge during social innovation implementation. The size of the entrepreneurial team, the nature of the social innovation, and the interest orientation – that is, the overlap between entrepreneurial team members and beneficiaries – are found to play a role in the type of tensions encountered and their content. Research limitations/implications – The chosen research approach limits the generalizability of the research results. Replication in other settings and with other types of social innovation is therefore encouraged. Originality/value – In contrast to most existing studies, this research focuses on nascent social innovation projects borne by teams. It proposes that social-business tensions are not necessarily predominant in social innovation management. It suggests the importance of interest orientation as an underestimated factor in the study of social entrepreneurship.

Disciplines :

Social economics
Strategy & innovation
General management, entrepreneurship & organizational theory

Author, co-author :

Dufays, Frédéric ; KU Leuven

Language :

English

Title :

Exploring the drivers of tensions in social innovation management in the context of social entrepreneurial teams

Publication date :

2019

Journal title :

Management Decision

ISSN :

0025-1747

Publisher :

Emerald Group Publishing, United Kingdom

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

1344-1361

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Funders :

F.R.S.-FNRS - Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique [BE]

Available on ORBi :

since 02 September 2021

Statistics

Number of views

53 (5 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

86 (5 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

Bibliography

Amason, A.C. and Sapienza, H.J. (1997), “The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict”, Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 495-516.
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K. and Zhou, J. (2014), “Innovation and creativity in organizations”, Journal of Management, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1297-1333.
Andriopoulos, C. and Gotsi, M. (2017), “Methods of paradox”, in Smith, W.K., Lewis, M.W., Jarzabkowski, P. and Langley, A. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 513-528.
Andriopoulos, C. and Lewis, M.W. (2009), “Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: managing paradoxes of innovation”, Organization Science, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 696-717.
Audretsch, D. (2012), “Entrepreneurship research”, Management Decision, Vol. 50 No. 5, pp. 755-764.
Backes-Gellner, U., Werner, A. and Mohnen, A. (2015), “Effort provision in entrepreneurial teams: effects of team size, free-riding and peer pressure”, Journal of Business Economics, Vol. 85 No. 3, pp. 205-230.
Battilana, J. and Dorado, S. (2010), “Building sustainable hybrid organizations: the case of commercial microfinance organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 1419-1440.
Battilana, J. and Lee, M. (2014), “Advancing research on hybrid organizing: insights from the study of social enterprises”, Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 397-441.
Besharov, M.L. and Smith, W.K. (2014), “Multiple logics within organizations: explaining their varied nature and implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 364-381.
Bhatt, P. and Altinay, L. (2013), “How social capital is leveraged in social innovations under resource constraints?”, Management Decision, Vol. 51 No. 9, pp. 1772-1792.
Cajaiba-Santana, G. (2014), “Social innovation: moving the field forward. A conceptual framework”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 82, pp. 42-51, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/technological-forecasting-and-social-change/issues
Child, C., Witesman, E.M. and Braudt, D.B. (2015), “Sector choice: how fair trade entrepreneurs choose between nonprofit and for-profit forms”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 832-851.
Dawson, P. and Daniel, L. (2010), “Understanding social innovation: a provisional framework”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 9-21.
Defourny, J. and Nyssens, M. (2010), “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.
Dufays, F. and Huybrechts, B. (2014), “Connecting the dots for social value: a review on social networks and social entrepreneurship”, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 214-237.
Dufays, F. and Huybrechts, B. (2016), “Where do hybrids come from? Entrepreneurial team heterogeneity as an avenue for the emergence of hybrid organizations”, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 777-796.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Schoonhoven, C.B. (1990), “Organizational growth: linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among US semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 504-529.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011), “Case study”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 301-316.
Folta, T.B., Delmar, F. and Wennberg, K. (2010), “Hybrid entrepreneurship”, Management Science, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 253-269.
Forsyth, D.R. (2010), Group Dynamics, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA.
Francis, D.H. and Sandberg, W.R. (2000), “Friendship within entrepreneurial teams and its association with team and venture performance”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 5-26.
Germak, A.J. and Robinson, J.A. (2013), “Exploring the motivation of nascent social entrepreneurs”, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 5-21.
Gui, B. (1991), “The economic rationale for the ‘third sector’”, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 551-572.
Heiskala, R. (2007), “Social innovations: structural and power perspectives”, in Hämäläinen, T.J. and Heiskala, R. (Eds), Social Innovations, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 52-79.
Huarng, K.-H. and Yu, T.H.-K. (2011), “Entrepreneurship, process innovation and value creation by a non-profit SME”, Management Decision, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 284-296.
Jay, J. (2013), “Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 137-159.
Jones, M.B. (2007), “The multiple sources of mission drift”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 299-307.
Lawrence, T.B., Dover, G. and Gallagher, B. (2014), “Managing social innovation”, in Dogson, M., Gann, D.M. and Phillips, N. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 316-334.
Lettice, F. and Parekh, M. (2010), “The social innovation process: themes, challenges and implications for practice”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 139-158.
Lewis, M.W. and Smith, W.K. (2014), “Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: sharpening the focus and widening the scope”, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 127-149.
Mertens, S. (1999), “Nonprofit organisations and the social economy: two ways of understanding the third sector”, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 501-520.
Mertens, S. and Marée, M. (2012), “The limits of the economic value in measuring the global performance of social innovation”, in Nicholls, A. and Murdock, A. (Eds), Social Innovation: Blurring Boundaries to Reconfigure Markets, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 114-136.
Michaud, V. (2013), “Business as a pretext? Managing social-economic tensions on a social enterprise’s websites”, M@n@gement, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 294-331.
Mulgan, G. (2006), “The process of social innovation”, Innovations, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 145-162.
Mulgan, G. (2012), “The theoretical foundations of social innovation”, in Nicholls, A. and Murdock, A. (Eds), Social Innovation: Blurring Boundaries to Reconfigure Markets, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 33-65.
Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J. and Mulgan, G. (2010), The Open Book of Social Innovation, Nesta, Young Foundation, London.
Nelson, T., Nelson, D., Huybrechts, B., Dufays, F., O’shea, N. and Trasciani, G. (2016), “Emergent identity formation and the co-operative: theory building in relation to alternative organizational forms”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 28 Nos 3-4, pp. 286-309.
Nicholls, A. and Murdock, A. (2012), “The nature of social innovation”, in Nicholls, A. and Murdock, A. (Eds), Social Innovation: Blurring Boundaries to Reconfigure Markets, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 1-30.
Pache, A.-C. and Santos, F. (2010), “When worlds collide: the internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 455-476.
Patton, M.Q. (2002), Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Perrini, F., Vurro, C. and Costanzo, L.A. (2010), “A process-based view of social entrepreneurship: from opportunity identification to scaling-up social change in the case of San Patrignano”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 515-534.
Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’regan, N. and James, P. (2015), “Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: a systematic review”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 428-461.
Phills, J.A., Deiglmeier, K. and Miller, D.T. (2008), “Rediscovering social innovation”, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall, pp. 34-43.
Renko, M. (2013), “Early challenges of nascent social entrepreneurs”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 1045-1069.
Ritchie, W.J., Young, G., Shahzad, A.M., Kolodinsky, R.W. and Melnyk, S.A. (2015), “The influence of plural organizational forms on beliefs and outcomes related to new product adoption”, Management Decision, Vol. 53 No. 7, pp. 1619-1641.
Roy, K. and Karna, A. (2015), “Doing social good on a sustainable basis: competitive advantage of social businesses”, Management Decision, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 1355-1374.
Smith, B.R. and Stevens, C.E. (2010), “Different types of social entrepreneurship: the role of geography and embeddedness on the measurement and scaling of social value”, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 575-598.
Smith, W.K. and Lewis, M.W. (2011), “Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 381-403.
Smith, W.K., Gonin, M. and Besharov, M.L. (2013), “Managing social-business tensions: a review and research agenda for social enterprises”, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 407-442.
Stohl, C. and Cheney, G. (2001), “Participatory processes/paradoxical practices: communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy”, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 349-407.
Tracey, P. and Stott, N. (2017), “Social innovation: a window on alternative ways of organizing and innovating”, Innovation: Organization & Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 51-60.
Wright, C.R., Manning, M.R., Farmer, B. and Gilbreath, B. (2000), “Resourceful sensemaking in product development teams”, Organization Studies, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 807-825.
Wry, T. and York, J. (2017), “An identity-based approach to social enterprise”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 437-460.
Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Yitshaki, R. and Kropp, F. (2016), “Motivations and opportunity recognition of social entrepreneurs”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 546-565.