مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد درک کارآفرینی اجتماعی – الزویر 2020

1. Introduction

2. Theoretical framework

3. Material and methods

4. Results and discussion

5. Implications and future research directions

6. Conclusions

Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

This study investigates the cultural drivers of social entrepreneurship (SE), focusing on the way in which Global Leadership and Organizational Behaviour Effectiveness (GLOBE) affects social entrepreneurial activity (SEA) in different countries. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and GLOBE project were used as data sources. Cultural values, regional affiliation, and economic development levels were used to cluster the selected countries. Correlations between values and operating SEA were checked for the entire sample, as well as for each of the three clusters. A positive correlation between ‘Gender Egalitarianism’ and narrowly defined operating SEA and negative correlation between ‘Uncertainty Avoidance’ and the aforementioned SEA was confirmed for all the countries, while the linkage between ‘Future Orientation’, ‘In-group Collectivism’, and operating SEA was partially verified. Research results suggest that culture is not sufficient to justify national differences in SE rates.

Introduction

In recent years, the concept of Social Entrepreneurship (SE) has attracted the attention of both academics and practitioners, as shown by a growing body of theoretical literature as well as by the rise of new scientific and non-scientific communities (Chell, 2007; Dacin, Dacin, & Matear, 2010; Dwivedi & Weerawardena, 2018; Rey-Martí, RibeiroSoriano, & Palacios-Marqués, 2016; Zahra, Gedajlovic, Neubaum, & Shulman, 2009). Due to the fast growth of the phenomenon, emerging research areas are developing in the field of business strategy, entrepreneurship, public sector management, sociology, political science, economics, and education (Kedmenec & Strašek, 2017; Short, Moss, & Lumpkin, 2009) emphasising the need for new theoretical and practical contributions. Indeed, SE is characterised by a lack of theoretical boundaries, and is challenged by competing definitions and conceptual frameworks, gaps in the literature, and limited empirical data (Mair & Marti, 2006; Nicholls, 2006; Rey-Martí et al., 2016).

As Cukier, Trenholm, Carl, and Gekas (2011) show, the available studies about SE lack consistency in definitions and objects of focus, as well as rigorous comparative analysis. In a content analysis of 567 unique articles concerning ‘social entrepreneur’ or ‘social entrepreneurship’, the authors highlight the existing overlap between and among different levels of analysis, including studies of individuals (micro level), studies of organizations and processes (meso level), and broader studies of the economic, political and societal context (macro level). They also find that the majority of existing contributions are more theoretically grounded than empirically based.