Social Conflict, Social Networks, and Social Enterprise

• In Event: Emerging Approaches to Nonprofit Research

Abstract

Developed in the 1950s and 60s, as researchers brought together sociometrics, social anthropology, and the study of ‘cliques’, social network analysis has been developed into a valuable tool for the study of social structure (Scott, 2017). It has helped define how social structures developed, how networks of exclusion emerge, and how knowledge is both shared and discovered through social interaction (Phillipson et al, 2004; Granovetter, 2005). This research seeks to develop a quantitative social network methodology (SNM) that helps enable a fuller study of social enterprises operating in transitioning, austere and authoritarian environments.

Allan (1989) sought to show that networks are developed amongst individuals who share similar economic, social, and cultural backgrounds and we can see this develop in social enterprises where communities come together to solve shared problems with ‘bottom up’ solutions (Yalcin-Riolett et al, 2014; May and Diesendorf, 2018; Kooij et al, 2018). However, the current research has suggested where there is limited access to education, there is limited bottom-up development of social enterprises and many communities are reliant on the technocratic outreach of benefactors from different backgrounds. It’s therefore important that social enterprises are studied separately to their beneficiaries, as their cultural capital, networks, and habitus, are vastly different to those that they serve. Research has shown that enterprises having a separate network to their beneficiaries allows for relationships to be leveraged on their behalf, but that they are unlikely to be sustained without ongoing support, which is an issue in societies where rent-seeking economic behaviours have taken root (6, 1989). To allow a substantive approach, the SNM is being united with the theoretical frame of Social Conflict Theory.

Social Conflict Theory is an appropriate frame to use as it is built on the premise that groups live in zero-sum environments, where any improvement in one group’s position is detrimental to their competitors (Simon, 2016). The current research has indicated that varying social actors see this to be the case, with the development of new technologies and practices being seen as competitive actions, which reduces the legitimacy of the state (Markard, 2011). The conflict will not only be measured between enterprises and political actors, but also with their beneficiaries. The separate habitus of the enterprises and beneficiaries can mean that the solutions to community problems are dictated to them, as seen with the criticised ‘One laptop per child’ programme, in these cases the network can be examined to see where the failure of communication occurred (Wooster, 2018).

The methodology seeks to identify and measure the networks of the social enterprises themselves, highlighting potential areas of conflict between cooperating and competitive parties. Utilising a quantitative approach will allow the networks of multiple enterprises to be compared and contrasted, along with the relationships they build. It will also enable us to study the relationships they build with political agents, and how they change according the objectives and focus of the enterprise.

Author

• Michael Maher, University of Northampton