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

By Peter A. Dacin, M. Dacin, Maggie Matear. 2010

1,416 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Business and International Management, Management of Technology and Innovation, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d048bcba894b1befbc027f6a20c011c340e16c79

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Business and International Management

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

The Social and Economic Mission of Social Enterprises: Dimensions, Measurement, Validation, and Relation (2015, background): “…the social entrepreneurship literature has emphasized the importance of the individual social entrepreneur who plays a central role in social enterprises (Barendsen & Gardner, 2004; Dacin et al., 2010; Robinson, 2006; Sharir & Lerner, 2006; Shaw & Carter, 2004; Van Slyke & Newman, 2006).”
Digital Sustainability and Entrepreneurship: How Digital Innovations Are Helping Tackle Climate Change and Sustainable Development (2020, background): “Considerable debate persists about the nature and identity of the social entrepreneur, the tensions between social and commercial outcomes, and the definition of social value ( Dacin et al., 2010; Saebi et al., 2019; Wry & York, 2017).”
Venturing for Others with Heart and Head: How Compassion Encourages Social Entrepreneurship (2012, background): “Thus, we explain the mechanisms by which compassion encourages an individual's choice to found a social enterprise and offer theoretical rigor to a field where enthusiasm has outpaced conceptual development and refinement (Dacin et al., 2010).”
Social mission as competitive advantage: A configurational analysis of the strategic conditions of social entrepreneurship (2019, background): “Doherty et al. (2014), following the work of Dacin, Dacin, and Matear (2010), offer a similar criticism of the social and economic dichotomy in hybrid ventures and how this relates to competitive advantage, calling for further theoretical development and empirical insights.”
Social Entrepreneurship in Non-munificent Institutional Environments and Implications for Institutional Work: Insights from China (2017, positive): “Further, while prior studies argue that the social missions of social enterprises provide them with an inherent legitimacy (Dacin et al. 2010), our findings”
Social, Environmental and Sustainable Entrepreneurship Research (2015, methodology): “Six of the 10 publications are on SocE (Dacin et al., 2010; Hill, Kothari, & Shea, 2010; Lehner & Kansikas, 2013; Short et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2013; Zahra et al., 2009), one covers EnvE (Lenox & York, 2012), two review SustE (Hall et al., 2010; Shepherd & Patzelt, 2011), and one compares SocE,…”
Beyond the Moral Portrayal of Social Entrepreneurs: An Empirical Approach to Who They Are and What Drives Them (2016, background): “In studying social entrepreneurs’ moral portrait, we refer to three main elements that have repeatedly been referred to in the academic literature and more popular press: social entrepreneurs’ individual intentions to behave ethically in order to contribute to the collective interest and well-being ”
Crowdfunding social ventures: a model and research agenda (2013, positive): “Differences of SEs to traditional for-profits are shown in the literature to stem from . ambiguous and sometimes dichotomous aims of SEs (Dacin et al. 2010), torn between the social and commercial (Lehner 2011b; Moss et al. 2011), . alien corporate governance and legal and organizational structures ”
Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations (2014, methodology): “Under such conditions, social needs such as poverty or environmental pollution are more abundant, triggering greater demand for SE (Dacin et al., 2010; Estrin et al., 2013a; Mair & Marti, 2009; Zahra et al., 2009).”
Social innovation: a window on alternative ways of organizing and innovating (2017, background): “For those who are interested in the nuances of the definitional debates surrounding social entrepreneurship, Dacin, Dacin, and Matear (2010) provide a thorough synthesis and critique of the main issues.”
A Positive Theory of Social Entrepreneurship (2012, neutral): “…suggest that social entrepreneurship is connected with and may enrich more established fields of inquiry such as structuration theory, institutional entrepreneurship or social movements (Mair and Marti 2006), and also cultural entrepreneurship and commercial entrepreneurship (Dacin et al. 2010).”
A Quantitative Comparison of Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship: Toward a More Nuanced Understanding of Social Entrepreneurship Organizations in Context (2013, background): “Despite definitional ambiguity, there seems to be consensus that it is motivation and the relative importance of social value creation (as opposed to economic value creation) that distinguishes social entrepreneurs from commercial entrepreneurs (Zahra et al. 2009, Dacin et al. 2010).”
Exploring environmental entrepreneurship: : Identity coupling, venture goals, and stakeholder incentives (2016, background): “16 Scholars have argued that entrepreneurial action can address a broad array of societal issues (Dacin et al., 2010; Mair and Mart ı, 2006; Russo, 2010; Short et al., 2009), including degradation of the natural environment (Dean and McMullen, 2007; Hall et al.”