Innovation in social enterprises: An intended outcome through an unexpected process
George Tsekouras, Nick Marshall, Jose Christian
Brighton Business School
Centre for Change, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management
Multiple definitions of social enterprise still abound, but as Doherty et al. (2014, p.420) suggest, they typically "draw out … two defining characteristics of SE: the adoption of some form of commercial activity to generate revenue; and the pursuit of social goals". This paper aims to contribute a more detailed and systematic understanding of social enterprise (SE) innovation than currently exists in the literature. Although research on social enterprise has, according to some, reached a new level of maturity, both theoretically and empirically, there are still a number of important gaps (Doherty, Haugh, & Lyon, 2014; Young & Brewer, 2016). Thus, while things have moved on somewhat from earlier controversies about how to define social enterprise (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006; Chell, 2007; Dato-on & Kalakay, 2016; Galera & Borzaga, 2009) and now include a wider range of theoretical perspectives and thematic areas of interest (Dey & Steyaert, 2012, 2018; Maibom & Smith, 2016; Nyssens, 2007; Pinch & Sunley, 2015), there has been little systematic research specifically on the nature of innovation in social enterprise and how far this differs from innovation processes in other domains. In particular, beyond the more general presentation of SEs as socially innovative, there has been very little discussion of the varying types, processes, practices, supporting conditions, and outcomes of innovation in the SE domain. In their extensive review of the SE literature, Doherty et al. (2014, p.423) observe that there are "limited contributions to understanding the determinants and processes of SE innovation and the relative innovativeness of SEs when compared with other organizational forms". The focus of this paper is on laying stronger foundations for making sense of SE innovation, from which such comparisons could subsequently be made. We offer a framework for understanding the nature, influences, and outcomes of SE innovation and we use this framework to interrogate an extensive mixed methods dataset of empirical evidence collected from a three year European-funded research project on social enterprise innovation.
13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC)
The human side of Innovation
Organisational Learning and Knowledge Capabilities 2019 Conference: The Human Side of Innovation - The Ship Hotel, Brighton, United Kingdom
Duration: 24 Apr 2019 → 26 Apr 2019
Organisational Learning and Knowledge Capabilities 2019 Conference
OLKC
Tsekouras et al - 2019 - Innovation practices in social enterprises - Final full paperAccepted author manuscript, 577 KB
Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Innovation in social enterprises: An intended outcome through an unexpected process'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
innovation Social Sciences
maturity Social Sciences
revenue Social Sciences
literature Social Sciences
research project Social Sciences
determinants Social Sciences
evidence Social Sciences
George Tsekouras
G.Tsekouras@brighton.ac.uk
Brighton Business School - Principal Research Fellow
Centre for Change, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management - Principal Research Fellow
Tsekouras, G., Marshall, N., & Christian, J. (2019). Innovation in social enterprises: An intended outcome through an unexpected process. In 13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC): The human side of Innovation
Tsekouras, George ; Marshall, Nick ; Christian, Jose. / Innovation in social enterprises : An intended outcome through an unexpected process. 13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC): The human side of Innovation. 2019.
@inproceedings{fe543bd0b4dc4dcdbf047a0a3a27ac98,
title = "Innovation in social enterprises: An intended outcome through an unexpected process",
abstract = "Multiple definitions of social enterprise still abound, but as Doherty et al. (2014, p.420) suggest, they typically {"}draw out … two defining characteristics of SE: the adoption of some form of commercial activity to generate revenue; and the pursuit of social goals{"}. This paper aims to contribute a more detailed and systematic understanding of social enterprise (SE) innovation than currently exists in the literature. Although research on social enterprise has, according to some, reached a new level of maturity, both theoretically and empirically, there are still a number of important gaps (Doherty, Haugh, & Lyon, 2014; Young & Brewer, 2016). Thus, while things have moved on somewhat from earlier controversies about how to define social enterprise (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006; Chell, 2007; Dato-on & Kalakay, 2016; Galera & Borzaga, 2009) and now include a wider range of theoretical perspectives and thematic areas of interest (Dey & Steyaert, 2012, 2018; Maibom & Smith, 2016; Nyssens, 2007; Pinch & Sunley, 2015), there has been little systematic research specifically on the nature of innovation in social enterprise and how far this differs from innovation processes in other domains. In particular, beyond the more general presentation of SEs as socially innovative, there has been very little discussion of the varying types, processes, practices, supporting conditions, and outcomes of innovation in the SE domain. In their extensive review of the SE literature, Doherty et al. (2014, p.423) observe that there are {"}limited contributions to understanding the determinants and processes of SE innovation and the relative innovativeness of SEs when compared with other organizational forms{"}. The focus of this paper is on laying stronger foundations for making sense of SE innovation, from which such comparisons could subsequently be made. We offer a framework for understanding the nature, influences, and outcomes of SE innovation and we use this framework to interrogate an extensive mixed methods dataset of empirical evidence collected from a three year European-funded research project on social enterprise innovation.",
keywords = "Innovation, Social Enterprises",
author = "George Tsekouras and Nick Marshall and Jose Christian",
booktitle = "13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC)",
note = "Organisational Learning and Knowledge Capabilities 2019 Conference : The Human Side of Innovation, OLKC ; Conference date: 24-04-2019 Through 26-04-2019",
Tsekouras, G, Marshall, N & Christian, J 2019, Innovation in social enterprises: An intended outcome through an unexpected process. in 13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC): The human side of Innovation. Organisational Learning and Knowledge Capabilities 2019 Conference, Brighton, United Kingdom, 24/04/19.
Innovation in social enterprises : An intended outcome through an unexpected process. / Tsekouras, George; Marshall, Nick; Christian, Jose.
13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC): The human side of Innovation. 2019.
T1 - Innovation in social enterprises
T2 - Organisational Learning and Knowledge Capabilities 2019 Conference
AU - Tsekouras, George
AU - Marshall, Nick
AU - Christian, Jose
N2 - Multiple definitions of social enterprise still abound, but as Doherty et al. (2014, p.420) suggest, they typically "draw out … two defining characteristics of SE: the adoption of some form of commercial activity to generate revenue; and the pursuit of social goals". This paper aims to contribute a more detailed and systematic understanding of social enterprise (SE) innovation than currently exists in the literature. Although research on social enterprise has, according to some, reached a new level of maturity, both theoretically and empirically, there are still a number of important gaps (Doherty, Haugh, & Lyon, 2014; Young & Brewer, 2016). Thus, while things have moved on somewhat from earlier controversies about how to define social enterprise (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006; Chell, 2007; Dato-on & Kalakay, 2016; Galera & Borzaga, 2009) and now include a wider range of theoretical perspectives and thematic areas of interest (Dey & Steyaert, 2012, 2018; Maibom & Smith, 2016; Nyssens, 2007; Pinch & Sunley, 2015), there has been little systematic research specifically on the nature of innovation in social enterprise and how far this differs from innovation processes in other domains. In particular, beyond the more general presentation of SEs as socially innovative, there has been very little discussion of the varying types, processes, practices, supporting conditions, and outcomes of innovation in the SE domain. In their extensive review of the SE literature, Doherty et al. (2014, p.423) observe that there are "limited contributions to understanding the determinants and processes of SE innovation and the relative innovativeness of SEs when compared with other organizational forms". The focus of this paper is on laying stronger foundations for making sense of SE innovation, from which such comparisons could subsequently be made. We offer a framework for understanding the nature, influences, and outcomes of SE innovation and we use this framework to interrogate an extensive mixed methods dataset of empirical evidence collected from a three year European-funded research project on social enterprise innovation.
AB - Multiple definitions of social enterprise still abound, but as Doherty et al. (2014, p.420) suggest, they typically "draw out … two defining characteristics of SE: the adoption of some form of commercial activity to generate revenue; and the pursuit of social goals". This paper aims to contribute a more detailed and systematic understanding of social enterprise (SE) innovation than currently exists in the literature. Although research on social enterprise has, according to some, reached a new level of maturity, both theoretically and empirically, there are still a number of important gaps (Doherty, Haugh, & Lyon, 2014; Young & Brewer, 2016). Thus, while things have moved on somewhat from earlier controversies about how to define social enterprise (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006; Chell, 2007; Dato-on & Kalakay, 2016; Galera & Borzaga, 2009) and now include a wider range of theoretical perspectives and thematic areas of interest (Dey & Steyaert, 2012, 2018; Maibom & Smith, 2016; Nyssens, 2007; Pinch & Sunley, 2015), there has been little systematic research specifically on the nature of innovation in social enterprise and how far this differs from innovation processes in other domains. In particular, beyond the more general presentation of SEs as socially innovative, there has been very little discussion of the varying types, processes, practices, supporting conditions, and outcomes of innovation in the SE domain. In their extensive review of the SE literature, Doherty et al. (2014, p.423) observe that there are "limited contributions to understanding the determinants and processes of SE innovation and the relative innovativeness of SEs when compared with other organizational forms". The focus of this paper is on laying stronger foundations for making sense of SE innovation, from which such comparisons could subsequently be made. We offer a framework for understanding the nature, influences, and outcomes of SE innovation and we use this framework to interrogate an extensive mixed methods dataset of empirical evidence collected from a three year European-funded research project on social enterprise innovation.
KW - Innovation
KW - Social Enterprises
BT - 13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC)
Tsekouras G, Marshall N, Christian J. Innovation in social enterprises: An intended outcome through an unexpected process. In 13th International Conference on Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities (OLKC): The human side of Innovation. 2019