No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Innovation is identified in extant research as a defining characteristic of social entrepreneurial ventures (SEV s). Social innovations are desirable as they create employment opportunities, develop new industries and introduce new business models that address social needs. In recognition, governments and practitioners worldwide are looking at ways of fostering social innovations. Although there is growing interest in social innovation in various fields of research, there is little evidence of an in-depth empirical exploration of social innovations within the context of SEV s. Further, empirical research on social innovation in developing countries like India is lacking, though India is reported to have high levels of social entrepreneurial activity. This research intends to fill these gaps by empirically investigating social innovations in three for-profit SEV s in India. This thesis was based on the interpretive paradigm and adopted a subjective stance in exploring social innovations in for-profit SEVs. The objectives of this research are twofold. First, it attempts to understand the resource constraints under which social innovation emerges. Second, it investigates how SEV s overcome resource constraints through novel combinations of different forms of capital in line with the Schumpeterian view on innovation. In this inductive, exploratory study, qualitative data was collected from semi-structured interviews with multiple informants in three for-profit SEV s in India. The empirical evidence showed that social innovations are distinct in that they develop under resource constraints. In particular, access to financial and human capital was found to be lacking. The findings indicate that social capital was a key enabler of social innovations, and SEV s leveraged their social capital extensively to overcome resource constraints in their environments. Further, the entrepreneurial role of introducing a novel resource (capital) combination was performed by more collectivist forms of entrepreneurship. This included: collaborative entrepreneurship where an individual entrepreneur collaborated with a network of supporters; team entrepreneurship involving a team of social entrepreneurs; and collective entrepreneurship in a cooperative venture. This research underlines the complexity of the social innovation process and highlights the innovative use of capital forms in overcoming resource constraints. Suggestions for social entrepreneurs and practitioners on how to manage social innovations are implicit in its finding

The comparatively low levels of entrepreneurship in Scotland and in particular, low rates of female entrepreneurship are well documented and have been the focus of numerous government policies. In addition, there are specific issues regarding female entrepreneurship and whilst current literature broadly agrees that female owned businesses lag behind male owned business in terms of size and growth of the enterprise, the reasons for these differences are highly contested with no comprehensive explanations. This thesis seeks to explore the entrepreneurial process and the lived experiences of male and female entrepreneurs in Scotland to help shed further light on the situation. Utilising a phenomenological approach and deliberately avoiding leading participants on the issue of gender, the fieldwork yielded insights into gender and entrepreneurship in the Scottish context. The heterogeneity of female entrepreneurs became apparent, leading to the emergence of a new typology regarding how these entrepreneurs perceive and manage their gender. Further key findings also include the pivotal importance of the role of sector on the entrepreneurs’ experiences and the influence of their previous education and work experience on their entrepreneurial experiences. Similarities also emerged between male and female entrepreneurs in their experiences and attitudes towards a number of issues in entrepreneurship. Exploring the research findings through the theoretical lenses provided by Liberal Feminism, Social Feminism and the Theory of Effectuation helped to derive useful insight that contributes towards the calls for a new ‘female entrepreneurship theory’.

Entrepreneurs, in general, need strong entrepreneurial characteristics for sound enterprising behaviours. By examining the characteristics of potential and actual entrepreneurs across countries, this thesis aims to contribute to our understanding of entrepreneurial determinants, motivations and barriers. It is argued that the first step toward a theory of entrepreneurial behaviour is to identify its determinants. Though entrepreneurship is widely practised and taught, a unified indigenous theory is still lacking. Partially developed theories cannot reliably predict entrepreneurial outcomes (Ireland & Webb 2007; Zahra 2005). Borrowing concepts from parent disciplines, this thesis attempts to corroborate entrepreneurship theories by examining determinants of entrepreneurial behaviour in a cross-country setting. Individual entrepreneurial characteristics are analysed based on self-perceived environmental conditions such as economic, institutional, cultural and other motivations. The study adds to the literature by discovering the specific factors responsible for enduring entrepreneurial behaviour. It is argued that entrepreneurship research is mostly grounded in the western and developed economies of the world. In order to arrive at generalisable conclusions, this study compares entrepreneurial determinants, characteristics, motivations and barriers in the differing contexts of Pakistan, Afghanistan and the UK. Results are derived on a multi-method basis. Potential and practising entrepreneurs were surveyed using offline and online versions of the questionnaire. The instrument was adapted and scales modified based on existing models such as Hofstede's cultural indices, Rotter's I-E scale, Jackson's personality inventory, Linan and Chen (2009) and Giacomen et al. (2011). A combination of emic and etic approaches were used to bring about sample homogeneity across countries. In addition to the quantitative survey, limited qualitative interviews were also conducted to provide meaning to the data. Entrepreneurial characteristics were first regressed upon their determinants. Characteristics, cultural and institutional determinants, motivations and barriers were then compared across countries using multivariate analyses. Culture is evidenced in the results to act only as catalyst, while both institutional and personal strength significantly affect practising entrepreneurs. Work flexibility and administrative regulations interestingly predicted entrepreneurial characteristics. Comparative analyses revealed that the British group scored higher in perceived innovativeness, achievement need and locus of control compared to the other countries. The Afghans reported high risk-taking and competitive aggressiveness. In aggregate, while the British and Pakistani entrepreneurs consider institutional support as the main determinant, Afghans rely more on their cultural strength. This implies that Afghans, over decades of civil unrest, rely on culture and customs as viable forms of entrepreneurial support. Together with their Pakistani counterparts, they face barriers of corruption, fundamental necessities and worsening economic conditions, pushing them into necessity entrepreneurship. While several motivations emerged through the data, the interview analyses indicate that income is the strongest motivator for all three countries. Overall, the findings are partially consistent with previous literature. The study bears widespread implications by suggesting customised policies for fostering entrepreneurial behaviour/characteristics in unique country settings. In addition, the study's proposed eclectic model substantiates existing theories by projecting the factors necessary for entrepreneurial behaviour.

Entrepreneurs add value to society above and beyond the creation of new products and services, through their engagement in philanthropy. Entrepreneurial philanthropy draws upon practices of entrepreneurship and venture capital, to pursue the creation of social wealth through the application of different types of capital - social, symbolic, cultural and economic - in philanthropic activities. The objective of the study is to bring clarity and understanding to the phenomenon of entrepreneurial philanthropy. Specifically it explores: the motivations of wealthy entrepreneurs to engage in philanthropy; the ideology of entrepreneurial philanthropy; the practices of entrepreneurial philanthropy; and the different forms of capital actively deployed by entrepreneurial philanthropists to the organisations and programmes that they support. A qualitative research methodology and a multi research case strategy have been used on account of the exploratory nature of this study. Five entrepreneurial philanthropists and their foundations are examined in this study. Additional interviews were undertaken with individuals active in the field of philanthropy including: wealth consultants, intermediary philanthropy service providers, leading global foundation executive and nascent entrepreneurial philanthropists. This approach supported an inductive analysis and interpretation of the data, within and across the case studies, whilst considering the external landscape of entrepreneurial philanthropy. The study identified a range of factors that contribute to, and motivate, wealthy entrepreneurs to become actively engaged in philanthropy. The study shows that the ideology of entrepreneurial philanthropy is rooted in capitalism and the reproduction of a culture of entrepreneurship, which are believed to contribute to a strong and productive civil society. The study confirms the transferability and adaptability of practices from entrepreneurship to philanthropy. Finally the study established the deployment and accumulation of different forms of capital as being fundamental to the capacity of entrepreneurial philanthropists to create social and economic change at both micro and macro levels.

Institutional theory and its crucial role in organizational theory have evolved during the last few decades. Despite the seminal contribution of new institutionalism in organizational institutionalism, early neo-institutionalism studies mainly considered the constraints under which actors operate and emphasised institutional stability and organizational conformity. Therefore, these studies have been criticized for having an over-socialized view of actors. The emergence of institutional entrepreneurship research has advanced our knowledge on institutional change and contributed to the shift away from the over-socialized perspective by bringing agency back into institutional theory. However, research on institutional entrepreneurship has largely been done through single in-depth studies that overemphasize change results at the macro-level and present institutional entrepreneurs as under-socialized actors who, despite institutional pressures to conform and ]1omogenize, manage to dramatically change institutions. This comparative research study (a) extends the level of analysis beyond organizational fields across the national border to examine institutional entrepreneurs across different contexts and (b) focuses more closely on the interaction between actors and institutions at the micro-entrepreneurial level to disembed actors from both under- and over-socialized profiles. This is a cross-national qualitative research study among four small-medium food enterprises, which operate in two diverse institutional contexts (i.e. Greece and the UK). It conceptualizes institutional entrepreneurship in a comparative perspective between diverse institutional contexts by bridging it to the proximity of entrepreneurial actors that operate at the microlevel and are embedded into the structure of institutions. The empirical findings of this study highlight the heterogeneity of institutional entrepreneurship across diverse institutional contexts and different actors, providing implications that it is a country (structure) and actor (agency) specific process. Subsequently, this study moves beyond the over-socialized/under-socialized dichotomy by focusing on entrepreneurial actors who have the agency to strategically take action, while at the same time their interests and strategies are affected by institutional structures.