Find loads of the research methods in the social sciences book catalogues in this site as the choice of you visiting this page. You can also join to the website book library that will show you numerous books from any types. Literature, science, politics, and many more catalogues are presented to offer you the best book to find. The book that really makes you feels satisfied. Or that's the book that will save you from your job deadline.

Research methods in the social sciences

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Executive Overview We examine the current state of the social entrepreneurship literature, asking what is unique about social entrepreneurship and what avenues create opportunities for the future of the field. After an evaluation of social entrepreneurship definitions and comparison of social entrepreneurship to other forms, we conclude that while it is not a distinct type of entrepreneurship, researchers stand to benefit most from further research on social entrepreneurship as a context in which established types of entrepreneurs operate. We demonstrate these opportunities by describing avenues for further inquiry that emerge when examining valuable assumptions and insights from existing theories inherent in conventional, cultural, and institutional entrepreneurship frameworks and integrating these insights in ways that address the unique phenomena that exist in the context of social entrepreneurship.

Social Entrepreneurship: Why We Don't Need a New Theory and How We Move Forward From Here

Work on social entrepreneurship constitutes a field of study that intersects a number of domains, including entrepreneurial studies, social innovation, and nonprofit management. Scholars are beginning to contribute to the development of this new discipline through efforts that attempt to trace the emergence of social entrepreneurship as well as by comparing it to other organizational activities such as conventional entrepreneurship. However, as a nascent field, social entrepreneurship scholars are in the midst of a number of debates involving definitional and conceptual clarity, boundaries of the field, and a struggle to arrive at a set of relevant and meaningful research questions. This paper examines the promise of social entrepreneurship as a domain of inquiry and suggests a number of research areas and research questions for future study.

Social Entrepreneurship: A Critique and Future Directions

The impacts of the global economic crisis of 2008, the intractable problems of persistent poverty and environmental change have focused attention on organizations that combine enterprise with an embedded social purpose. Scholarly interest in social enterprise (SE) has progressed beyond the early focus on definitions and context to investigate their management and performance. From a review of the SE literature, the authors identify hybridity, the pursuit of the dual mission of financial sustainability and social purpose, as the defining characteristic of SEs.They assess the impact of hybridity on the management of the SE mission, financial resource acquisition and human resource mobilization, and present a framework for understanding the tensions and trade-offs resulting from hybridity. By examining the influence of dual mission and conflicting institutional logics on SE management the authors suggest future research directions for theory development for SE and hybrid organizations more generally.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ijmr.12028

Social Enterprises as Hybrid Organizations:A Review and Research Agenda*

Social entrepreneurship has been a topic of academic inquiry for nearly 20 years, yet relatively little scholarly output has appeared in mainstream management and entrepreneurship journals Our review of this literature reveals that conceptual articles outnumber empirical studies, and empirical efforts often lack formal hypotheses and rigorous methods These findings suggest that social entrepreneurship research remains in an embryonic state Future research would benefit from the incorporation of multivariate methods to complement the case study techniques that have dominated previous efforts Our review also suggests that social entrepreneurship is informed by common areas of interest to management scholars like entrepreneurship, public/nonprofit management, and social issues, all of which represent fruitful venues for future research efforts Therefore, we recommend that scholars embrace key themes in strategic entrepreneurship and frame their research using established theories, such as contingency theory, creation theory, discovery theory, innovation diffusion theory, resource dependence theory, and other theoretical bases relevant to strategic entrepreneurship research Copyright © 2009 Strategic Management Society

Research in social entrepreneurship: past contributions and future opportunities

Long-term orientation (LTO), defined as the tendency to prioritize the long-range implications and impact of decisions and actions that come to fruition after an extended time period, is a common characteristic of many family businesses. Prior research is equivocal regarding whether an LTO contributes to or detracts from family firm outcomes. Of particular interest is the extent to which family business can be entrepreneurial given an LTO. Drawing on the concept of entrepreneurial orientation (EO), propositions that relate long- and short-term management time horizons of family firms to five dimensions of EO (innovativeness, proactiveness, risk taking, competitive aggressiveness and autonomy) are developed. Specifically, we propose that an LTO will be positively associated with innovativeness, proactiveness, and autonomy but negatively associated with risk taking and competitive aggressiveness. We also address the long- and short-term implications of EO on the performance of family firms, and identify iss...

Long-term orientation: Implications for the entrepreneurial orientation and performance of family businesses

Scholars have compared and contrasted commercial and social entrepreneurship along a variety of dimensions, suggesting that entrepreneurial antecedents and outcomes differ within a social context. However, little is known about whether entrepreneurial processes differ within social contexts. In this paper, we ask to what extent the antecedents and outcomes that make social entrepreneurship unique influence entrepreneurial processes. Using an inputs–throughputs–outputs framework, we assess the relationship between four antecedents (social mission/motivation, opportunity identification, access to resources/funding, and multiple stakeholders) and three outcomes (social value creation, sustainable solutions, and satisfying multiple stakeholders) to the dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation (innovativeness, proactiveness, risk-taking, competitive aggressiveness, and autonomy) (Lumpkin and Dess, Acad Manag Rev 21(1):135–172, 1996). Our analysis suggests that many entrepreneurial processes remain essentially the same or are affected only slightly. However, autonomy, competitive aggressiveness, and risk-taking are influenced to some extent by the presence of multiple stakeholders and access to resources/funding. Entrepreneurial processes may also differ when applied to efforts to satisfy multiple stakeholders and achieve sustainable solutions. We subsequently discuss the implications of our analysis for future social entrepreneurship research and practice.

Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: how are they different, if at all?

Drawing on the organizational identity literature, this exploratory study examines the dual identities of award–winning social ventures recognized by FastCompany magazine and the Skoll Foundation. ...

Dual Identities in Social Ventures: An Exploratory Study

The availability of capital for microenterprises has grown rapidly due to microfinancing platforms such as Kiva. The investment decisions of microlenders are challenged due to the limited information about the microenterprises' characteristics and behavioral intentions. Extending signaling theory, we suggest that microenterprises' narratives on microfinancing platforms are an important means to signal valuable characteristics and behavioral intentions to prospective lenders. Results indicate that microenterprises, which signal autonomy, competitive aggressiveness, and risk-taking, are more likely to receive funding, and to receive it more quickly. Microenterprises that signal conscientiousness, courage, empathy, and warmth are less likely to get funded. Rhetorical signaling proactiveness, conscientiousness, courage, warmth, or zeal is negatively associated with loan repayment.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/ETAP_ETAP12110.pdf?abstractid=2545629&mirid=3

Todd W. Moss

Papers

Research in social entrepreneurship: past contributions and future opportunities

Long-term orientation: Implications for the entrepreneurial orientation and performance of family businesses

Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: how are they different, if at all?

Dual Identities in Social Ventures: An Exploratory Study

The Effect of Virtuous and Entrepreneurial Orientations on Microfinance Lending and Repayment: A Signaling Theory Perspective: