Managing conflicting objectives of social enterprises

Philippe Eiselein · Nikolay Anguelov Dentchev

27 citations0/0 files storedSocial enterprise journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences Business Strategies and Innovation Community Development and Social Impact

Abstract

Purpose Most strategies for managing conflicts between social and commercial objectives of social enterprises are discussed either at the individual or at the team level of analysis. This paper aims to argue in favor of taking into account both levels of analysis at the same time. It furthermore aims to unravel how management strategies at the individual and the team level reinforce one another. Design/methodology/approach This study adopts the theoretical lenses of personal values (at the individual level of analysis) and stewardship (at the team level). The authors have conducted 23 semi-structured interviews across three Belgian social enterprises. Primary data collection was complemented with secondary data of 12 annual reports and 314 newspaper articles. The variety of cases and the richness of primary and secondary data proved useful to elaborate on the mechanisms of managing conflicting objectives. Findings This paper highlights four bridging mechanisms that facilitate the mitigation of conflict between social and commercial objectives, i.e. fit of values, agile structure, partnerships and communications. It also shows how these mechanisms reinforce each other at the individual and team levels of analysis and thus form an iterative process for managing the conflicting objectives of social entrepreneurs. Originality/value This paper contributes by bringing the level of analysis on managing conflicting objectives at the intersection of the individual and team performance. It argues that social entrepreneurs should target both individuals and teams at the same time, to manage effectively conflicting objectives. The four mechanisms create an alignment and reflection iterative process for managing conflicting objectives.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 27 citations exist upstream.

References

2005How Many Interviews Are Enough?1992Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries 2006A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data 1997TOWARD A STEWARDSHIP THEORY OF MANAGEMENT 2006The qualitative research interview 2012An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values 2006Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship: Same, Different, or Both?2010Building Sustainable Hybrid Organizations: The Case of Commercial Microfinance Organizations

Cited by

2023Stakeholder Engagement in a Sustainable Circular Economy 2022Effects of the pandemic crisis on social enterprise: A case study from Georgia 2021Delineating novel aspects of social enterprise theory 2024Spirituality in social entrepreneurship: an ethical approach to sustainability 2023The influence of causation, entrepreneurial and social orientations on social enterprise performance in the nascent ecology of social enterprise

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.