On the importance of being scrappy : entrepreneurial orientation and bricolage in social enterprises

Abstract

Social enterprises are hybrid organizations that create social value using market-based models. Social entrepreneurship (SE) as a process is increasingly seen as holding promise for tackling mounting social and environmental problems in a financially sustainable manner. While the research field of SE has grown substantially over the past 20 years, much more empirical work is needed to add to its credibility and validate theoretical propositions.

This thesis begins from the premise that SE is not a unique domain of entrepreneurship, but rather a context in which entrepreneurship happens (Chell, 2007; Dacin, Dacin & Matear, 2010). However, entrepreneurship constructs that have been applied in commercial settings are expected to manifest differently in SE given the resource-constrained environments within which they operate (Austin, Stevenson & Wei-Skillern, 2006). The analysis examines three entrepreneurship constructs that are prevalent in the study of entrepreneurship in for-profit firms: entrepreneurial orientation (EO), which consists of three sub-dimensions (innovativeness, risk-taking and proactiveness) (Covin & Slevin, 1989; Hughes & Morgan, 2007); entrepreneurial bricolage (making do and being creative with existing resources) (Baker & Nelson, 2005); and, economic productivity (Battilana, Sengul, Pache & Model, 2015). These constructs are studied in terms of how they affect perceived social impact (Brown 2005).

Based on a survey of 233 social enterprises in Nova Scotia, Canada, findings indicate that both EO and bricolage are predictors of social impact, and that when EO is studied as a uni-dimensional construct bricolage partially mediates the relationship between EO and impact. When EO is studied as a three-dimensional construct, only proactiveness is a significant indicator of social impact and its effect is fully mediated by bricolage.

This study makes several important contributions to the field. It offers empirical evidence to support the predictive relationship of EO on social impact. It also advances EO theory in social contexts by providing insights on the relationships of each dimension of EO on social impact. The mediating role of bricolage in the relationship of EO and social impact is a strong contribution for understanding organizational behaviours in social enterprises, and antecedents of social impact. Finally, the relative importance of proactiveness compared to other EO dimensions and the mediating role of bricolage in the relationship between proactiveness and social impact offers insights that have implications for decision-makers and practitioners.