Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Linking the new institutionalism to entrepreneurial orientation (EO), my dissertation investigates institutional forces and entrepreneurial forces—two contradicting types of forces—as main effects and moderating effects upon practices and performance of organizations embedded in the institutional duality. The case chosen observes unique hybrid funders that this study collectively calls social investment funders (SIF), which integrate philanthropy and venture capital investment to create and implement a venture philanthropy model for a pursuit of their mission. A theoretical framework is developed to propose regulative and normative pressures from two dominant institutions governing SIFs. Original data collected from 146 organizations are scrutinized by moderated multiple regressions for two empirical studies: Study 1 for effects on SIFs’ venture philanthropy practices, and Study 2 for effects on SIFs’ social and financial performance. Multiple imputations, diagnostic analyses, and several post hoc analyses are also conducted for robustness of data and results from multiple regression analyses. Results from these analyses find that EO and venture capital institutional forces both enhance SIFs’ venture philanthropy practices. A hypothesis postulated for a negative relationship between the nonprofit status and venture philanthropy practices is also supported. Results from moderated regression analyses, along with a subgroup and EO subdimension analyses, confirm a moderating effect between EO and the nonprofit status, i.e., a regulative institutional pressure. A positive relationship is found in EO- financial performance, but not in EO-social performance. While support is lent to hypotheses posited for a social/financial performance relationship with donors’/investors’ demand for social outcomes, and with the management team’s training in business, the overall results remain mixed for Study 2. Nonetheless, this dissertation appears to be the first study to theorize and test EO as a micro-level condition enabling organizations to strategically shape and resist institutional pressures, and it reinforces that organizations’ behavior is not merely a product of their passive conformity to environmental forces, but of the agency, also. As such, this study aims to contribute to scholarly efforts by the “agency camp” of the new institutionalism and EO, answering a call from the leading scholars of both EO (Miller) and the new institutionalism (Oliver).

An ontology describing the constructs and their inter-relationships for business models has recently been built and evaluated: the Business Model Ontology (BMO). This ontology has been used to conceptually power a popular practitioner visual design tool: the Business Model Canvas (BMC). However, implicitly these works assume that designers of business models all have a singular normative goal: the creation of businesses that are financially profitable. These works perpetuate beliefs and businesses that do not create outcomes aligned with current natural and social science knowledge about long term individual human, societal and ecological flourishing, i.e. outcomes are not strongly sustainable. This limits the applicability and utility of these works. This exploratory research starts to overcome these limitations: creating knowledge of what is required of businesses for strongly sustainable outcomes to emerge and helping business model designers efficiently create high quality (reliable, consistent, effective) strongly sustainable business models. Based on criticism and review, this research project extends the BMO artefact to enable the description all the constructs and their inter-relationships related to a strongly sustainable business model. This results in the Strongly Sustainable Business Model Ontology (SSBMO). To help evaluate the SSBMO a practitioner visual design tool is also developed: the Strongly Sustainable Business Model Canvas (SSBMC). Ontological engineering (from Artificial Intelligence), Design Science and Systems Thinking methodological approaches were combined in a novel manner to create the Systemic Design Science approach used to build and evaluate the SSBMO. Comparative analysis, interviews and case study techniques were used to evaluate the utility of the designed artefacts. Formal 3rd party evaluation with 7 experts and 2 case study companies resulted in validation of the overall approaches used and the utility of the SSBMO. A number of opportunities for improvement, as well as areas for future work, are identified. This thesis includes a number of supplementary graphics included in separate (electronic) files. See “List of Supplementary Materials” for details.