In Search of the Identity of Social Enterprises: A Breakthrough in Welfare Production

• In Event: Social Economy Values and Logics: Colonisaton or Synergy?

Abstract

Business approaches to address social problem is now a global trend in human welfare production. Profit-seeking and social mission interwoven in one single entity blurs the traditional demarcation between non-profits and for-profits, where the former is conceived as delivering social benefits, while the later as maximizing profit. With the presence of the word “social”, “social enterprise” becomes an umbrella label covering all kinds of organizations, either for-profits or non-profits that conduct activities blending with various degree of social and economic return. This muddling spectrum of organizational activities encompassed in the term “social enterprise”. The legal forms enacted in different jurisdictions are also state-specific, politically crafted by individual government’s policy design. Because of the bewildering understanding of social enterprises, this study investigates the role of social enterprises by examining their organizational properties.

Methods:
By adopting theoretical framework of organizational capacity, we conducted in-depth case study of three renowned social enterprises in Hong Kong. Aside from collecting the organizational data, we conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with the chief-executive directors, managers, and employees which are the concerned group of the social enterprises. We used thematic framework analysis to assess nine dimensions of the three social enterprises, including (1) governance and leadership; (2) human resources management; (3) financial management; (4) organization planning; (5) Innovation and learning; (6) program management; (7) performance management; (8) partnership and external relationships; and (9) technology.

Findings:
Four themes were identified in this study. We found that social enterprises offer a paradigm that shift the traditional welfare production model to a “participation” form. They pay the cost to solve the social needs by creating the participation platform through operating a business but not for profit purpose, where the traditional welfare model cannot be solved. By means of this participation, the concerned groups are empowered to gain mastery over issues of concern to them through utilizing their own resources.

Conclusion:
We propose that social enterprises hold a distinct position by virtue of their creation of the “participation” welfare production model. This unique characteristic also connotes the non-triumphing and gap filling properties of social enterprises in welfare production. Hence, not all kinds of organizational activities in the social enterprise spectrum vindicate a new organization form. Co-operation between social enterprises, non-profits and for-profits in production of human welfare should be exemplified. This study provides policy maker for future direction of developing social enterprises.

Authors

• Michelle Hei Yan Shum, Hong Kong Baptist University

• Cheryl Chui, The University of Hong Kong

• Terry Lum, The University of Hong Kong