When tensions and barriers destroy social impact businesses: Multiple case studies based on Brazilian experience

Maryane Cristina de Souza Crestani; Graziela Dias Alperstedt; Helena Kuerten de Salles

doi:10.14211/regepe.esbj.e2528

Authors

Maryane Cristina de Souza Crestani maryanecristinadesouza@gmail.com
Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8930-0979
Graziela Dias Alperstedt gradial@gmail.com
Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0144-0406
Helena Kuerten de Salles helenaksalles@gmail.com
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7453-3219

DOI:

10.14211/regepe.esbj.e2528

Keywords:

Social Impact Business, Social Enterprises, Demise, Organizational Hybridity, Tensions, Barriers, Social Innovation

Abstract

Objective: This work aims to understand the failure of Social Impact Businesses (SIBs) in Florianópolis between 2017 and 2022 from the perspective of key stakeholders. Therefore, the enterprises SIB 1, SIB 2, and SIB 3 were studied. Methodology/approach: The research uses a qualitative, exploratory-descriptive approach, based on a multiple case study. The data were subjected to thematic, documentary, and interpretative analysis. Main results: Based on the tensions and barriers expressed in the field, four reasons related to the failure of SIBs were identified: (1) The shortage of financiers in the commercial and social-environmental fields; (2) The misalignment of support organizations with the local context; (3) Imbalance between social-environmental and commercial activities; and (4) Difficulty in defining a sustainable business model. Theoretical/methodological contributions: The reasons for the discontinuation of SIBs are related to the tensions and barriers identified in the literature. Interviews with key stakeholders provided a detailed analysis of the main challenges involving SIBs. Relevance/originality: The almost non-existent research on the failure of this type of enterprise justifies the present research and contributes to the literature and practice in the field of social enterprises. Social/management contributions: The study delves into the practical and contextual challenges that impact SIBs. The findings provide useful insights for managers, support organizations, and investors, helping them develop strategies to overcome these challenges faced by SIBs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ACATE – Associação Catarinense de Tecnologia. (2023, 16 de junho). Home Page. https://www.acate.com.br

Agarwal, N., Chakrabarti, R., Brem, A., & Bocken, N. (2020). Managing dilemmas of resource mobilization through jugaad: A multi-method study of social enterprises in Indian healthcare. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 14(3), 419–443. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1364

Alperstedt, G. D., Andion, C., & Pires, P. K. (2023). Dos empreendimentos sociais aos negócios de impacto: Examinando o debate teórico rumo à inovação social. REGEPE Entrepreneurship and Small Business Journal. https://doi.org/10.14211/regepe.e2214

Alvarenga, R. A. (2016). Study of the contributing factors to the mortality of micro and small enterprises in the state of Maranhão. International Journal of Innovation, 4(2), 106–118. https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v4i2.36

Andrade, C. (2017). Why did we create the SGB Lab? Medium: Social Good Brasil. https://medium.com/@socialgoodbr/por-que-criamos-o-sgb-lab-8086ed0a33e2

Alter, K. (2007). Social enterprise typology. Virtue Ventures. https://isfcolombia.uniandes.edu.co/images/201519/LRD31.pdf

Barki, E. (2015). Negócios de impacto: Tendência ou modismo? Sociedade e Gestão, 14, 14–17.

Barki, E., Rodrigues, J., & Comini, G. M. (2020). Negócios de impacto: Um conceito em construção. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas, 9(4), 477-501.

Battilana, J., Besharov, M., & Mitzinneck, B. (2018). On hybrids and hybrid organizing: A review and roadmap for future research. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence, & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526415066

Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing - Insights from the study of social enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.893615

Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364–381. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0431

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Byerly, R. T. (2015). The social contract, social enterprise, and business model innovation. Social Business, 4(4), 325–343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/204440814X14185703122883

Castellas, E. I., Stubbs, W., & Ambrosini, V. (2019). Responding to value pluralism in hybrid organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(3), 635–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3809-2

Caffrey, J. (2020, June). A profile of social enterprise and their stakeholder networks and engagement. Irish Social Business Campus (ISBC), 01-51.

Child, C. (2020). Whence paradox? Framing away the potential challenges of doing well by doing good in social enterprise organizations. Organization Studies, 41(8), 1147–1167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619857467

Da Silva, L. C., da Silva Marinho, L. E., Rodrigues, M. G., & Andrade, J. D. N. T. (2023). Fatores condicionantes à mortalidade de MPE’s–Micro e Pequenas Empresas no Brasil. ID on line. Revista de Psicologia, 17(65), 141-149. https://doi.org/10.14295/idonline.v17i65.3690

Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 54–67.

De Mon, I. A., Gabaldón, P., & Nuñez, M. (2022). Social entrepreneurs: Making sense of tensions through the application of alternative strategies of hybrid organizations. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 18(2), 975–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00731-5

Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2017). Fundamentals for an international typology of social enterprise models. Voluntas, 28(6), 2469–2497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9884-7

Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 417–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12028

Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2014.09.001

França Filho, G. C. de, Rigo, A. S., & Souza, W. J. de. (2020). A reconciliação entre o econômico e o social na noção de empresa social: Limites e possibilidades (no contexto brasileiro). Organizações & Sociedade, 27(94), 556–584. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-9270948

Fundação CERTI. (2014). Sinapse da inovação: Estratégia catarinense na geração de empreendimentos inovadores. Fundação CERTI.

Garcia, F. T., Ten Caten, C. S., de Campos, E. A. R., Callegaro, A. M., & de Jesus Pacheco, D. A. (2022). Mortality risk factors in micro and small businesses: Systematic literature review and research agenda. Sustainability, 14(5), 2725.

Garrow, E. E., & Hasenfeld, Y. (2014). Social enterprises as an embodiment of a neoliberal welfare logic. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(11), 1475–1493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214534674

Godoy, A. S. (1995). Pesquisa qualitativa: Tipos fundamentais. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 35(3), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-75901995000300004

Hackett, M. T. (2016). Solving ‘social market failures’ with social enterprises? Grameen shakti (village energy) in Bangladesh. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 7(3), 312-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2016.1188324

He, T., Liu, M. J., Phang, C. W., & Luo, J. (2022). Toward social enterprise sustainability: The role of digital hybridity. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175, 121360.

Hudson, R. (2009). Life on the edge: Navigating the competitive tensions between the "social" and the "economic" in the social economy and in its relations to the mainstream. Journal of Economic Geography, 9(4), 493–510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbp005

Jornada Amazônia. (n.d.). Home Page. Retrieved June 16, 2023, from https://jornadaamazonia.org.br/

Kraatz, M. S., Block, E. S., & Lounsbury, M. (2008). Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, & K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 243-275). SAGE Publications Ltd.

Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002

Mackey, J., & Sisodia, R. (2013). Capitalismo consciente. HSM Editora.

OBISF – Observatório de Inovação Social de Florianópolis. (2022). Home Page. Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina. https://observafloripa.com.br/

Martin, B., Walsh, L., Keating, A., Vyakarnam, S., & Shaw, E. (2024). The demise of a rising social enterprise for persons with disabilities: The ethics and the uncertainty of pure effectual logic when scaling up. Journal of Business Ethics, 191, 107–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05390-4

Ometto, M. P., et al. (2019). From balancing missions to mission drift: The role of the institutional context, spaces, and compartmentalization in the scaling of social enterprises. Business & Society, 58(5), 1003–1046. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0007650318758329

Pel, B., Wittmayer, J., Dorland, J., & Jorgensen, M. S. (2018). Unpacking the social innovation ecosystem: A typology of empowering network constellations. In Annals of the 10th International Social Innovation Research Conference (ISIRC).

Petrini, M., Scherer, P., & Back, L. (2016). Business model with a social impact. RAE Revista de Administração de Empresas, 56(2), 209–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020160207

Pires, P. K. (2021). A gramática do impacto: A figura complexa dos negócios de impacto no Brasil [Doctoral dissertation, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina]. http://sistemabu.udesc.br/pergamumweb/vinculos/000093/0000932a.pdf

Receita Federal. (n.d.). Home Page. Retrieved from https://www.gov.br/receitafederal/pt-br

Robinson, J. (2006). Navigating social and institutional barriers to markets: How social entrepreneurs identify and evaluate opportunities. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change (pp. 202-230). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230625655_7

Santos, F., Pache, A.-C., & Birkholz, C. (2015). Making hybrids work: Aligning business models and organizational design for social enterprises. California Management Review, 57(3), 36-58. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.36

Sarhangi, R., Mashayekhi, A. N., & Souzanchi Kashani, E. (2021). From black and white to yin and yang: Exploring the management of tensions in social enterprises. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2021.1987970

Sebrae. (2014). Como definir o preço de venda de um produto ou serviço. Artigos. https://sebrae.com.br/sites/PortalSebrae/artigos/como-definir-o-preco-de-venda-de-um-produt o-ou-servico,cc9836627a963410VgnVCM1000003b74010aRCRD

Shaw, E., & Bruin, A. (2013). Reconsidering capitalism: The promise of social innovation and social entrepreneurship? International Small Business Journal, 31(7), 737–746. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242613497494

Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3), 407–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242613497494

Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 392-414. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958

Sroka, W., & Meyer, N. (2021). A theoretical analysis of social entrepreneurship: The case of Poland and South Africa. Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research, 8(1), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.15549/jeecar.v8i1.596

Stevens, R., Moray, N., & Bruneel, J. (2015). The social and economic mission of social enterprises: Dimensions, measurement, validation, and relation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 39(5), 1051–1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12091

Vázquez-Maguirre, M., & Portales, L. (2018). Profits and purpose: Organizational tensions in indigenous social enterprises. Intangible Capital, 14(4), 604–618. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.1208

Young, D. R., & Lecy, J. D. (2014). Defining the universe of social enterprise: Competing metaphors. Voluntas, 25(5), 1307–1332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9396-z