首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Institutional work to navigate ethical dilemmas: Evidence from a social enterprise
Institution:1. LM Thapar School of Management, Thapar Institute of Engineering & Technology, Patiala, Punjab, India;2. Research School of Management, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia;1. University of Notre Dame, United States of America;2. Technical University of Munich, Germany;1. Martin J. Whitman School of Business, Syracuse University, United States of America;2. Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, United States of America;1. emlyon business school, 23, avenue Guy de Collongue, CS 40203 69134 Ecully Cedex, France;2. School of Economics and Management, Lund University, P.O. Box 7080, S-220 07 Lund, Sweden;1. Department of Entrepreneurship & Emerging Enterprises, Whitman School of Management, Syracuse University, USA;2. Department of Economics, Grove City College, USA;3. Department of Management, College of Business, Florida Atlantic University, USA;1. Assistant Professor of Applied Data Analytics at John Cabot University, Rome, Italy;2. Research Affiliate at the Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn, Germany;3. Research Fellow at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), Germany;4. Associate Professor for Small Business & Entrepreneurship, University of Groningen, the Netherlands;5. Adjunct lecturer, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Germany
Abstract:Social entrepreneurs encounter ethical dilemmas while addressing their social and commercial missions. The literature has implicitly acknowledged the ethical dilemmas social entrepreneurs face; however, the nature and implications of these ethical dilemmas and how social entrepreneurs navigate them are underexplored and undertheorized. We address this by conducting a 36-month field study of a social enterprise operating in a rural resource-constrained environment in India and dealing with a stigmatized product. We found four categories of ethical dilemmas faced by social entrepreneurs: challenges in engaging the community (equality vs. efficiency and fairness vs. care), challenges related to spillover effects (right vs. responsibilities), challenges in balancing diverse stakeholders (emotionally detached vs. emotionally engaged), and challenges related to cross-subsidization efforts (utilitarianism vs. fairness). Further, we identified three types of institutional work social entrepreneurs engage in to address ethical dilemmas: recognition work, responsibilization work, and reflective judgment work. We label these three institutional works as inclusion work - purposive actions of an entity to address ethical dilemmas by implementing its program in a way that supports the most marginalized. Our study makes an important contribution to the literature on ethics in the context of social entrepreneurship by identifying specific ethical dilemmas social entrepreneurs face in managing hybridity (balancing social-commercial objectives) and enhancing social impact (managing social-social objectives). Moreover, through the concept of inclusion work, our research not only integrates insights from ethics and institutional theories but also responds to the recent call to address grand societal challenges through institutional work.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号