Exploring the drivers of tensions in social innovation management in the context of social entrepreneurial teams

Author:

Dufays Frédéric

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify tensions that are emerging in the invention and implementation of social innovation by social entrepreneurial teams and highlights elements that influence the type of tension encountered. Design/methodology/approach Four cases are selected theoretically, studied individually, and compared to one another to identify tensions and patterns of tensions. Findings The findings reveal the predominant tensions related to goals and identity during social innovation invention and those related to time and knowledge during social innovation implementation. The size of the entrepreneurial team, the nature of the social innovation, and the interest orientation – that is, the overlap between entrepreneurial team members and beneficiaries – are found to play a role in the type of tensions encountered and their content. Research limitations/implications The chosen research approach limits the generalizability of the research results. Replication in other settings and with other types of social innovation is therefore encouraged. Originality/value In contrast to most existing studies, this research focuses on nascent social innovation projects borne by teams. It proposes that social-business tensions are not necessarily predominant in social innovation management. It suggests the importance of interest orientation as an underestimated factor in the study of social entrepreneurship.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Management Science and Operations Research,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference57 articles.

1. The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict;Journal of Management,1997

2. Innovation and creativity in organizations;Journal of Management,2014

3. Andriopoulos, C. and Gotsi, M. (2017), “Methods of paradox”, in Smith, W.K., Lewis, M.W., Jarzabkowski, P. and Langley, A. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 513-528.

4. Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: managing paradoxes of innovation;Organization Science,2009

5. Entrepreneurship research;Management Decision,2012

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3