PL EN


2018 | 1/2018 (73), t.2 | 240-257
Article title

Blending Conflicting Logics by Social Entrepreneurs – The Role of Entrepreneurial Mindset

Content
Title variants
PL
Łączenie różnych porządków instytucjonalnych przez przedsiębiorców społecznych – rola przedsiębiorczego myślenia
Languages of publication
EN PL
Abstracts
EN
Social entrepreneurs, regardless the geographical context or legal form of their enterprises blend commercial market logic and social good logic. We argue that the concept entrepreneurial mindset plays a key role in understanding how blending conflicting logics management activities of social entrepreneurs occurs. This paper aims to identify the role of particular entrepreneurial mindset attributes in enabling social entrepreneurs to successfully act simultaneously in social and market contexts. Through pursuing interpretative phenomenological research with seven social entrepreneurs from five different countries, we have identified three different schemes of blending social and commercial logics. Our findings have also identified the intensity of particular EM attributes among the three groups of entrepreneurs. The main contribution of this paper in bringing together two entrepreneurship streams of research to advance our understanding on how social entrepreneurs blend competing institutional logics.
PL
Przedsiębiorstwa społeczne, niezależnie od położenia geograficznego lub form prawnych, równolegle realizują cele społeczne i rynkowe. Niniejsze opracowanie ma na celu zidentyfikować rolę poszczególnych wymiarów modelu mentalnego przedsiębiorcy w łączeniu dwóch ram i porządków instytucjonalnych; społecznej z rynkową. W toku badań jakościowych opartych na wywiadach fenomenologicznych z siedmioma przedsiębiorcami społecznymi z pięciu krajów zidentyfikowano trzy podstawowe tryby definiujące jak przedsiębiorcy społeczni łączą cele społeczne z komercyjnymi. Wyniki badań prezentują również natężenie poszczególnych wymiarów modelu mentalnego przedsiębiorcy u tych trzech grup. Wartością dodaną opracowania jest połączenie koncepcji modeli mentalnych przedsiębiorcy z dorobkiem badań nad przedsiębiorczością społeczną, po to, aby zidentyfikować wspólne cechy przedsiębiorców społecznych w kontekście konieczności realizacji przez nich celów społecznych i komercyjnych.
Year
Pages
240-257
Physical description
Dates
published
2018-04-27
Contributors
  • Cracow University of Economics
  • Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Germany
References
  • 1. Alvarez, S. and Busenitz, L.W. (2001). The entrepreneurship of resource-basedtheory. Journal of Management, 27 (October 2016), 755–775, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700609.
  • 2. Baron, R.A. (1998). Cognitive mechanisms in entrepreneurship: Why and when enterpreneurs think differently than other people. Journal of Business Venturing, 13(4), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00031-1.
  • 3. Baron, R.A. (2006). Opportunity recognition as pattern recognition: How entrepreneurs “connect the dots” to identify new business opportunities. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 104–119, https://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2006.19873412.
  • 4. Baron, R.A. (2014). Cognitive foundations of entrepreneurship. In: Essentials of entrepreneurship. Evidence and practice (1st ed., pp. 3–58). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • 5. Batko, R. and Bogacz-Wojtanowska, E. (2015). Social enterprise: Finding identity between social and economic goals. Problemy Zarzadzania, 13(4/56), 195–206, https://doi.org/10.7172/1644-9584.56.12.
  • 6. Battilana, J. and Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.
  • 7. Busenitz, L.W. and Barney, J.B. (1997). Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(1), 9–30, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(96)00003-1.
  • 8. Cope, J. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship through phenomenological inquiry: Philosophical and methodological issues. International Small Business Journal, 23(2), 159–183.
  • 9. Dacin, P.A., Dacin, M.T. and Matear, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: Why we don’t need a new theory and how we move forward from here. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 37–58.
  • 10. Dana, L.P., Etemad, H. and Wright, R.W. (2008). Toward a paradigm of symbioticentrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 5(2), 109–126.
  • 11. Dees, J.G. (2007). Taking social entrepreneurship seriously. Society, 44(3), 24–31.
  • 12. 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, 1(1), 32–53.
  • 13. Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • 14. Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H. and Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 681–703.
  • 15. Dohert, B., Haugh, H. and Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16, 417–436, https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12028.
  • 16. Eatough, V. and Smith, J.A. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 165–194). SAGE Publications.
  • 17. Gigerenzer, G. (2002). The adaptive toolbox. In: Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox (1st ed.) (pp. 37–50). MIT Press.
  • 18. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action phases and mind-sets. In: Handbook of motivation and cognition. Foundations of social behavior (vol. 2, pp. 53–92). Max-Planck-Institut für psychologische Forschung. New York, London: Guilford Press.
  • 19. Gollwitzer, P.M., Heckhausen, H. and Steller, B. (1990). Deliberative and implemental mind-sets: Cognitive tuning toward congruous thoughts and information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1119–1127, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1119.
  • 20. Gollwitzer, P.M. and Kinney, R.F. (1989). Effects of deliberative and implemental mindsets on illusion of control. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 56(4), 531–542, https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702236868.
  • 21. Haynie, J.M., Shepherd, D.A. and Patzelt, H. (2012). Cognitive adaptability and anentrepreneurial task: The role of metacognitive ability and feedback. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 237–265, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00410.x.
  • 22. Haynie, J.M., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E. and Earley, P.C. (2010). A situated metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2), 217–229, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.001.
  • 23. Ireland, R.D., Hitt, M.A. and Sirmon, D.G. (2003). A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963–989, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00086-2.
  • 24. Kirzner, I.M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship (1st ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • 25. Low, C. (2006). A framework for the governance of social enterprises. International Journal of Social Economics, 33(5/6), 376–385.
  • 26. Mair, J. and Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41, 36–44.
  • 27. Mair, J. and Marti, I. (2009). Entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 419–435.
  • 28. Marshall, R.S. (2011). Conceptualizing the international for-profit social entrepreneur. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(2), 183–198, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0545-7.
  • 29. Mathisen, J.E. and Arnulf, J.K. (2013). Competing mindsets in entrepreneurship: The cost of doubt. International Journal of Management Education, 11(3), 132–141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2013.03.003.
  • 30. McGrath, R.G. and MacMillan, I.C. (2000). The entrepreneurial mindset. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  • 31. McMullen, J.S. and Kier, A.S. (2016). Trapped by the entrepreneurial mindset: Opportunity seeking and escalation of commitment in the Mount Everest disaster. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(6), 663–686, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.09.003.
  • 32. Meyskens, M., Carsrud, A.L. and Cardozo, R.N. (2010). The symbiosis of entities in the social engagement network : The role of social ventures. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(5), 425–455, https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620903168299.
  • 33. Mitchell, R.K., Busenitz, L.W., Bird, B., Marie Gaglio, C., McMullen, J.S., Morse, E.A. and Smith, J.B. (2007). The central question in entrepreneurial cognition research 2007. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(1), 1–27, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00161.x.
  • 34. Mitchell, R.K., Busenitz, L.W., Theresa, L., McDougall, P.P., Morse, E.A. and Smith, J.B. (2002). Toward a theory of entrepreneurial cognition: Rethinking the people side of entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, (806), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-8520.00001.
  • 35. Moss, T.W., Lumpkin, G.T. and Short, J.C. (2008). The dependent variables of social entrepreneurship research. In: Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 709–720). Babson Park, MA: Babson College.
  • 36. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications.
  • 37. Naumann, C. (2017). Entrepreneurial mindset: A synthetic literature review. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 5(3), 149–172, http://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2017.050308.
  • 38. Pache, A. and Chowdhury, I. (2012). Social entrepreneurs as institutionally embedded entrepreneurs: Towards a new model of social entrepreneurship education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11, 494–510.
  • 39. Pache, A. and Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972–1001.
  • 40. Peredo, A.M. and McLean, M. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56–65.
  • 41. Praszkier, R. and Nowak, A. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
  • 42. Roy, K. and Karna, A. (2015). Doing social good on a sustainable basis: Competitive advantage of social businesses. Management Decision, 53(6), 1355–1374, https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2014-0561.
  • 43. Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448–469, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.448.14602.
  • 44. Short, J.C., Ketchen Jr, D.J., Shook, C.L. and Ireland, R.D. (2010). The concept of“opportunity” in entrepreneurship research: Past accomplishments and future challenges. Journal of Management, 36(1), 40–65.
  • 45. Simon, M., Houghton, S.M. and Aquino, K. (2000). Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture formation: How individuals decide to start companies. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(98), 113–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00003-2.
  • 46. 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, 22(6), 575–598, https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2010.488405.
  • 47. Smith, J.A. and Eatough, V. (2006). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. London: Sage Publications.
  • 48. Simms, M. (2009). Insights from a management prophet: Mary Parker Follett on social entrepreneurship. Business and Society Review, 114(3), 349–363.
  • 49. Spear, R., Cornforth, C. and Aiken, M. (2009). The governance challenges of socialenterprises: Evidence from a UK empirical study. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 80(2), 247–273.
  • 50. Starnawska, M. (2014). Zachowanie poprzez sieciowanie w przedsiębiorczości społecznej w odpowiedzi na trudne otoczenie instytucjonalne – przypadek pięciu spółdzielni socjalnych. Problemy Zarządzania, 4(49), 97–116.
  • 51. Stevenson, H.H. and Jarillo, J.C. (2007). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial management. In: Á . Cuervo, D. Ribeiro and S. Roig (eds), Entrepreneurship: Concepts, theory and perspective (pp. 155–170).
  • 52. Tracey, P. and Phillips, N. (2007). The distinctive challenge of educating social entrepreneurs: A postscript and rejoinder to the special issue on entrepreneurship education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(2), 264–271.
  • 53. Urbaniec, M. and Żur, A. (2016). Editorial. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 4(4), 7–10.
  • 54. Vega, G. and Kidwell, R. (2007). Toward a typology of new venture creators: Similarities and contrasts between business and social entrepreneurs. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 15–28.
  • 55. Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, 3(1), 119–138.
  • 56. Verreynne, M.L., Miles, M.P. and Harris, C. (2013). A short note on entrepreneurship as method: a social enterprise perspective. International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, 9, 113–128.
  • 57. Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
  • 58. Yunus, M. (2011). Creating a new civilization through social entrepreneurship. Transaction Publishers.
  • 59. Zhu, Y., Rooney, D. and Phillips, N. (2016). Practice-based wisdom theory for integrating institutional logics: A new model for social entrepreneurship learning and education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 15(3), 607–625.
  • 60. Żur, A. (2014). Building competitive advantage through social value creation – A comparative case study approach to social entrepreneurship. Problemy Zarządzania, 12(4), 56–71.
  • 61. Żur, A. (2015). Social problems as sources of opportunity: Antecedents of social entrepreneurship opportunities, Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 3(4), 73–87, https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2015.030405.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
ISSN
1644-9584
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.desklight-2d9a8409-8568-45fa-b1ce-89592fc4c830
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.