Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A framework to overcome barriers to social entrepreneurship using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach

  • Soft computing in decision making and in modeling in economics
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social entrepreneurs play an essential role in innovative solutions to address the world’s most challenging societal problems. Although the value of innovative ideas is undeniable during the new venture creation process, not all creative ideas can be implemented. Many barriers hinder nascent social entrepreneurs from realizing their new ideas. The aim of this study is twofold: (1) to provide a holistic list of barriers that hinder social venture creation; and (2) to determine the solutions to overcome the detected barriers. This study employs an integrated methodology to identify barriers and solutions. First, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to determine the barriers. Following this, essential barriers were identified with the fuzzy Delphi (F-Delphi) method. Next, the weight of each barrier was calculated using the improved fuzzy step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (IMF-SWARA). Then, fuzzy weighted aggregated sum product assessment (F-WASPAS) was used to rank solutions to overcome these barriers. The findings may help organizations advise nascent social entrepreneurs about potential obstacles, which may help reduce the number of entrepreneurs abandoning their ideas. Furthermore, a comprehensive sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness and effectiveness of the results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data that support the findings of the study are available from the authors upon reasonable request.

References

  • Agarwal S, Kant R, Shankar R (2020) Evaluating solutions to overcome humanitarian supply chain management barriers: a hybrid fuzzy SWARA-fuzzy WASPAS approach. Int J Disast Risk Reduct 51:101838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al Mamun A, Thurasamy R, Fazal SA (2021) Entrepreneurial index for low-income households in Malaysia. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 77:101013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich HE (1990) Using an ecological perspective to study organizational founding rates. Entrep Theory Pract 14(3):7–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altinay L, Sigala M, Waligo V (2016) Social value creation through tourism enterprise. Tour Manag 54:404–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvand A, Mirhosseini SM, Ehsanifar M, Zeighami E, Mohammadi A (2021) Identification and assessment of risk in construction projects using the integrated FMEA-SWARA-WASPAS model under fuzzy environment: a case study of a construction project in Iran. Int J Constr Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2021.1877875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvord SH, Brown LD, Letts CW (2004) Social entrepreneurship and societal transformation: an exploratory study. J Appl Behav Sci 40(3):260–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amouri A, Festa G, Shams SR, Sakka G, Rossi M (2021) Technological propensity, financial constraints, and entrepreneurial limits in young entrepreneurs’ social business enterprises: the Tunisian experience. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 173:121126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson FO, Ford M (2017) Entry barriers and nonprofit founding rates: An examination of the Milwaukee voucher school population. Nonprofit Policy Forum 8(1):71–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansari ZN, Kant R, Shankar R (2020) Evaluation and ranking of solutions to mitigate sustainable remanufacturing supply chain risks: a hybrid fuzzy SWARA-fuzzy COPRAS framework approach. Int J Sustain Eng 13(6):473–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arenius P, Minniti M (2005) Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics 24:233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin J, Stevenson H, Wei-Skillern J (2006) Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Entrep Theory Pract 30(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin J, Stevenson H, Wei-Skillern J (2012) Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Rev Adm 47:370–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Bewayo ED, Portes LSV (2016) Environmental factors for social entrepreneurship success: comparing four regions. Am J Manag 16(4):39

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchflower DG, Oswald AJ (1998) What makes an entrepreneur? J Labor Econ 16(1):26–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein D (2004) How to change the world: social entrepreneurs and the power of new ideas. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozhikin I, Macke J, da Costa LF (2019) The role of government and key non-state actors in social entrepreneurship: a systematic literature review. J Clean Prod 226:730–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braga JC, Proença T, Ferreira MR (2014) Motivations for social entrepreneurship—evidences from Portugal. Tékhne 12:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui TD, Tsai FM, Tseng ML, Ali MH (2020) Identifying sustainable solid waste management barriers in practice using the Fuzzy Delphi method. Resour Conserv Recycl 154:104625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkett I (2010) Financing social enterprise: understanding needs and realities. Brisbane, Foresters Community Finance.

  • Büyüközkan G, Havle CA, Feyzioğlu O (2021) An integrated SWOT based fuzzy AHP and fuzzy MARCOS methodology for digital transformation strategy analysis in airline industry. J Air Transp Manag 97:102142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caliendo M, Fossen FM, Kritikos AS (2009) Risk attitudes of nascent entrepreneurs–new evidence from an experimentally validated survey. Small Bus Econ 32:153–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camenzuli A, McKague K (2015) Team microfranchising as a response to the entrepreneurial capacity problem in low-income markets. Soc Enterp J 11(1):69–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellas EI-P, Ormiston J, Findlay S (2018) Financing social entrepreneurship: the role of impact investment in shaping social enterprise in Australia. Soc Enterp J 14(2):130–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavich J, Chinta R (2021) Nascent entrepreneurs, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and the moderators of race, gender, and government support. Entrep Res J 12(3):363–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Çetinkaya C, Erbaş M, Kabak M, Özceylan E (2022) A mass vaccination site selection problem: an application of GIS and entropy-based MAUT approach. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 2022:101376

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang PL, Hsu CW, Chang PC (2011) Fuzzy Delphi method for evaluating hydrogen production technologies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 36(21):14172–14179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang J, Benamraoui A, Rieple A (2014) Learning-by-doing as an approach to teaching social entrepreneurship. Innov Educ Teach Int 51(5):459–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen CC, Greene PG, Crick A (1998) Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? J Bus Ventur 13(4):295–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chwolka A, Raith MG (2012) The value of business planning before start-up—a decision-theoretical perspective. J Bus Ventur 27(3):385–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen B, Winn MI (2007) Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. J Bus Ventur 22(1):29–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson P, Gordon SR (2012) Panel studies of new venture creation: a methods-focused review and suggestions for future research. Small Bus Econ 39(4):853–876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson P, Honig B (2003) The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. J Bus Ventur 18(3):301–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies IA, Haugh H, Chambers L (2019) Barriers to social enterprise growth. J Small Bus Manag 57(4):1616–1636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Carolis DM, Litzky BE, Eddleston KA (2009) Why networks enhance the progress of new venture creation: the influence of social capital and cognition. Entrep Theory Pract 33(2):527–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deakins D, Whittam G (2000) Business start-up: theory, practice and policy. In: Carter S, Jones Evans D (eds) Enterprise and small business: principles, practice and policy. Prentice-Hall, pp 115–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Dees JG, Anderson BB (2003) 2. For-profit social ventures. Int J Entrep Educ 2:1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Dees JG (1998) The meaning of social entrepreneurship. http://www.sogenc.org/dosyalar/6-TheMeaningofsocialEntrepreneurship.pdf. Accessed 14 Nov 2021

  • Del Giudice M, Garcia-Perez A, Scuotto V, Orlando B (2019) Are social enterprises technological innovative? A quantitative analysis on social entrepreneurs in emerging countries. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 148:119704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmar F, Shane S (2006) Does experience matter? The effect of founding team experience on the survival and sales of newly founded ventures. Strateg Organ 4(3):215–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeTienne DR (2010) Entrepreneurial exit as a critical component of the entrepreneurial process: theoretical development. J Bus Ventur 25(2):203–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimov D (2010) Nascent entrepreneurs and venture emergence: opportunity confidence, human capital, and early planning. J Manag Stud 47(6):1123–1153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorado S (2006) Social entrepreneurial ventures: different values so different process of creation, no? J Dev Entrep 11(04):319–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Dufays F, Huybrechts B (2014) Connecting the dots for social value: a review on social networks and social entrepreneurship. J Soc Entrep 5(2):214–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim A, Battilana J, Mair J (2014) The governance of social enterprises: mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Res Organ Behav 34:81–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckhardt JT, Shane SA (2003) Opportunities and entrepreneurship. J Manag 29(3):333–349

    Google Scholar 

  • El Ebrashi R (2013) Social entrepreneurship theory and sustainable social impact. Soc Responsib J 9(2):188–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Financier Worldwide (2020) The impact of social entrepreneurship on economic growth. Financier Worldwide Magazine, May-2020, https://www.financierworldwide.com/the-impact-of-social-entrepreneurship-on-economic-growth. Accessed 18 Jan 2022

  • Farinha L, Sebastião JR, Sampaio C, Lopes J (2020) Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: discovering origins, exploring current and future trends. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 17(1):77–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filatova U, Semeryanova N, Suslova S, Gabudina A, Kopytova A (2019) Legal aspect of social entrepreneurship. In E3S Web of Conferences (vol 91, 1–8). EDP Sciences

  • Garg H, Sharaf IM (2022) A new spherical aggregation function with the concept of spherical fuzzy difference for spherical fuzzy EDAS and its application to industrial robot selection. Comput Appl Math 41(5):1–26

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gartner WB (1985) A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon of new venture creation. Acad Manag Rev 10(4):696–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghazali Z, Lim MRT, Jamak ABSA (2019) Maintenance performance improvement analysis using fuzzy Delphi method: a case of an international lube blending plant in Malaysia. J Qual Maint Eng 25(1):162–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghorabaee MK, Zavadskas EK, Amiri M, Turskis Z (2016) Extended EDAS method for fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making: an application to supplier selection. Int J Comput Commun Control 11(3):358–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths MD, Gundry LK, Kickul JR (2013) The socio-political, economic, and cultural determinants of social entrepreneurship activity: an empirical examination. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 20:341–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halberstadt J, Spiegler AB (2018) Networks and the idea-fruition process of female social entrepreneurs in South Africa. Soc Enterp J 14(4):429–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris SP, Renko M, Caldwell K (2013) Accessing social entrepreneurship: perspectives of people with disabilities and key stakeholders. J Vocat Rehabil 38(1):35–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugh H (2007) Community–led social venture creation. Entrep Theory Pract 31(2):161–182

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hechavarria DM, Renko M, Matthews CH (2012) The nascent entrepreneurship hub: goals, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and start-up outcomes. Small Bus Econ 39(3):685–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hervieux C, Voltan A (2018) Framing social problems in social entrepreneurship. J Bus Ethics 151(2):279–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hockerts K (2006) Entrepreneurial opportunity in social purpose business ventures. Social entrepreneurship. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 142–154

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogendoorn B (2016) The prevalence and determinants of social entrepreneurship at the macro level. J Small Bus Manag 54:278–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogendoorn B, Pennings E, Thurik R (2010) What do we know about social entrepreneurship: an analysis of empirical research. ERIM Report Series, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

  • Hoogendoorn B, Van der Zwan P, Thurik R (2019) Sustainable entrepreneurship: the role of perceived barriers and risk. J Bus Ethics 157(4):1133–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howorth C, Smith SM, Parkinson C (2012) Social learning and social entrepreneurship education. Acad Manag Learn Educ 11(3):371–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hynes B (2009) Growing the social enterprise–issues and challenges. Soc Enterp J 5(2):114–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilieva G, Yankova T, Klisarova-Belcheva S (2018) Decision analysis with classic and fuzzy EDAS modifications. Comput Appl Math 37(5):5650–5680

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ip CY, Zhuge T, Chang YS, Huang TH, Chen YL (2022) Exploring the determinants of nascent social entrepreneurial behaviour. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(6):3556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isik AT, Adali EA (2016) A new integrated decision making approach based on SWARA and OCRA methods for the hotel selection problem. Int J Adv Oper Manag 8(2):140–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Ismail A, Johnson B (2019) Operating as a social enterprise within resource and institutional constraints. Entrep Res J 11(1):20170120

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantis HD, Federico JS, García SI (2020) Entrepreneurship policy and systemic conditions: evidence-based implications and recommendations for emerging countries. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 72:100872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karam A, Hussein M, Reinau KH (2021) Analysis of the barriers to implementing horizontal collaborative transport using a hybrid fuzzy Delphi-AHP approach. J Clean Prod 321:128943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keles Taysir N (2021) A Multilevel perspective of nascent social entrepreneur disengagement. Pamukkale Üniv Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 47:269–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerlin JA (2012) Defining social enterprise across different contexts: a conceptual framework based on institutional factors. Social enterprises. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 91–117

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Keršuliene V, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z (2010) Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA). J Bus Econ Manag 11(2):243–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalid S, Dixon S, Vijayasingham L (2022) The gender responsiveness of social entrepreneurship in health—a review of initiatives by Ashoka fellows. Soc Sci Med 293:114665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalilzadeh M, Kebriyaii O, Šaparauskas J, Lepkova N (2021) Towards an efficient approach for identification and selection of stakeholder engagement strategies: a case study. E&M Econ Manag 24(4):56–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Kickul J, Lyons TS (2015) Financing social enterprises. Entrep Res J 5(2):83–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollmann T, Stöckmann C, Kensbock JM (2017) Fear of failure as a mediator of the relationship between obstacles and nascent entrepreneurial activity—an experimental approach. J Bus Ventur 32(3):280–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korosec RL, Berman EM (2006) Municipal support for social entrepreneurship. Public Adm Rev 66(3):448–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruse P, Wach D, Wegge J (2021) What motivates social entrepreneurs? A meta-analysis on predictors of the intention to found a social enterprise. J Small Bus Manag 59(3):477–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo YF, Chen PC (2008) Constructing performance appraisal indicators for mobility of the service industries using fuzzy Delphi method. Expert Syst Appl 35(4):1930–1939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lan H, Zhu Y, Ness D, Xing K, Schneider K (2014) The role and characteristics of social entrepreneurs in contemporary rural cooperative development in China: case studies of rural social entrepreneurship. Asia Pac Bus Rev 20(3):379–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeming K (2002) Community businesses–lessons from Liverpool, UK. Community Dev J 37(3):260–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehner OM, Kansikas J (2012) Opportunity recognition in social entrepreneurship: a thematic meta analysis. J Entrep 21(1):25–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang W, Zhao G, Wu H, Dai B (2019) Risk assessment of rockburst via an extended MABAC method under fuzzy environment. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 83:533–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao J, Gartner WB (2006) The effects of pre-venture plan timing and perceived environmental uncertainty on the persistence of emerging firms. Small Bus Econ 27:23–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin Z, Ayed H, Bouallegue B, Tomaskova H, Jafarzadeh Ghoushchi S, Haseli G (2021) An integrated mathematical attitude utilizing fully fuzzy bwm and fuzzy waspas for risk evaluation in a SOFC. Mathematics 9(18):2328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu P, Saha A, Mishra AR, Rani P, Dutta D, Baidya J (2022) A BCF–CRITIC–WASPAS method for green supplier selection with cross-entropy and Archimedean aggregation operators. J Amb Intell Hum Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-022-03745-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin GT, Moss TW, Gras DM, Kato S, Amezcua AS (2013) Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: how are they different, if at all? Small Bus Econ 40(3):761–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons TS, Lichtenstein GA (2010) A community-wide framework for encouraging social entrepreneurship using the pipeline of entrepreneurs and enterprises model. Handbook of research on social entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair J, Marti I (2006) Social entrepreneurship research: a source of explanation, prediction, and delight. J World Bus 41(1):36–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair J, Schoen O (2007) Successful social entrepreneurial business models in the context of developing economies: an explorative study. Int J Emerg Mark 2(1):54–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manjon MJ, Merino A, Cairns I (2022) Business as not usual: a systematic literature review of social entrepreneurship, social innovation, and energy poverty to accelerate the just energy transition. Energy Res Soc Sci 90:102624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mardani A, Nilashi M, Zakuan N, Loganathan N, Soheilirad S, Saman MZM, Ibrahim O (2017) A systematic review and meta-Analysis of SWARA and WASPAS methods: theory and applications with recent fuzzy developments. Appl Soft Comput 57:265–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matić B, Marinković M, Jovanović S, Sremac S, Stević Ž (2022) Intelligent novel IMF D-SWARA—rough MARCOS algorithm for selection construction machinery for sustainable construction of road infrastructure. Buildings 12(7):1059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavi RK, Goh M, Zarbakhshnia N (2017) Sustainable third-party reverse logistic provider selection with fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy MOORA in plastic industry. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91(5):2401–2418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercader V (2017) Influence of social entrepreneurship in organizations, family, and society: causes and solutions for success. Am J Manag 17(2):65–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer CR, Cohen DG, Gauthier J (2020) Social entrepreneurship, stakeholder management, and the multiple fitness elements of sustainability: where cash is no longer king. J Small Bus Entrep 32(5):431–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller TL, Wesley CL (2010) Assessing mission and resources for social change: an organizational identity perspective on social venture capitalists ‘decision criteria. Entrep Theory Pract 34(4):705–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller TL, Wesley CL, Williams DE (2012) Educating the minds of caring hearts: comparing the views of practitioners and educators on the importance of social entrepreneurship competencies. Acad Manag Learn Educ 11(3):349–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moniri MR, Tabriz AA, Ayough A, Zandieh M (2021) Turnaround project risk assessment using hybrid fuzzy SWARA and EDAS method: case of upstream oil process industries in Iran. J Eng Des Technol 19(4):966–988

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan G (2006) The process of social innovation. Innov Technol Gov Glob 1(2):145–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz P, Cacciotti G, Ucbasaran D (2020) Failing and exiting in social and commercial entrepreneurship: the role of situated cognition. J Bus Ventur Insights 14:e00196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murillo-Luna JL, García-Uceda E, Asín-Lafuente J (2021) Obstacles to social entrepreneurship. Emerald Publishing Limited

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Narayanamoorthy S, Brainy JV, Manirathinam T, Kalaiselvan S, Kureethara JV, Kang D (2021) An adoptable multi-criteria decision-making analysis to select a best hair mask product-extended weighted aggregated sum product assessment Method. Int J Comput Intell Syst 14(1):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nascimento LDS, Da Costa Júnior JC, Salazar VS, Chim-Miki AF (2021) Coopetition in social entrepreneurship: a strategy for social value devolution. Int J Emerg Mark 2021:1746–8809

    Google Scholar 

  • Newth J, Woods C (2014) Resistance to social entrepreneurship: how context shapes innovation. J Soc Entrep 5(2):192–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls A (2010) The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: reflexive isomorphism in a pre–paradigmatic field. Entrep Theory Pract 34(4):611–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocampo L, Ebisa JA, Ombe J, Escoto MG (2018) Sustainable ecotourism indicators with fuzzy Delphi method–a Philippine perspective. Ecol Ind 93:874–888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padilla-Rivera A, do Carmo BBT, Arcese G, Merveille N (2021) Social circular economy indicators: selection through fuzzy Delphi method. Sustain Prod Consum 26:101–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pamucar D, Simic V, Lazarević D, Dobrodolac M, Deveci M (2022) Prioritization of sustainable mobility sharing systems using integrated fuzzy DIBR and fuzzy-rough EDAS model. Sustain Cities Soc 82:103910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panpatil SS, Prajapati H, Kant R (2022) Effect of green supply chain practices on sustainable performance indicators: a fuzzy MADM approach. Process Integr Optim Sustain 2022:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Parekh N, Attuel-Mendès L (2022) Social entrepreneurship finance: the gaps in an innovative discipline. Int J Entrep Behav Res 28(1):83–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pärenson T (2011) The criteria for a solid impact evaluation in social entrepreneurship. Soc Bus Rev 6(1):39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker SC, Belghitar Y (2006) What happens to nascent entrepreneurs? An econometric analysis of the PSED. Small Bus Econ 27(1):81–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perçin S (2019) An integrated fuzzy SWARA and fuzzy AD approach for outsourcing provider selection. J Manuf Technol Manag 30(2):531–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini F, Vurro C, Costanzo LA (2010) A process-based view of social entrepreneurship: from opportunity identification to scaling-up social change in the case of San Patrignano. Entrep Reg Dev 22(6):515–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrović G, Mihajlović J, Ćojbašić Ž, Madić M, Marinković D (2019) Comparison of three fuzzy MCDM methods for solving the supplier selection problem. Facta Univ Ser Mech Eng 17(3):455–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro P, Daniel A, Moreira A (2021a) Social enterprise performance: the role of market and social entrepreneurship orientations. VOLUNTAS Int J Volunt Nonprofit Organ 32(1):45–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piva E, Rossi-Lamastra C (2018) Human capital signals and entrepreneurs’ success in equity crowdfunding. Small Bus Econ 51(3):667–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prasad CS, Satish VJ (2018) Embedding diversity in social entrepreneurial research: India’s learning laboratories. Social entrepreneurship and sustainable business models. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp 3–30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Purdue D (2001) Neighbourhood governance: leadership, trust and social capital. Urban Stud 38(12):2211–2224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renko M (2013) Early challenges of nascent social entrepreneurs. Entrep Theory Pract 37(5):1045–1069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J (2006) Navigating social and institutional barriers to markets: how social entrepreneurs identify and evaluate opportunities. Social entrepreneurship. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 95–120

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rosca E, Agarwal N, Brem A (2020) Women entrepreneurs as agents of change: a comparative analysis of social entrepreneurship processes in emerging markets. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 157:120067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudnik K, Bocewicz G, Kucińska-Landwójtowicz A, Czabak-Górska ID (2021) Ordered fuzzy WASPAS method for selection of improvement projects. Expert Syst Appl 169:114471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1980) Hierarchical analysis of behavior in competition: prediction in chess. Behav Sci 25(3):180–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahebi IG, Arab A, Toufighi SP (2020) Analyzing the barriers of organizational transformation by using fuzzy SWARA. J Fuzzy Ext Appl 1(2):88–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Saleem M (2020) Analyzing the social entrepreneurship ecosystem in Pakistan and its effects on society. Hum Soc Sci 27(1):13–27

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sansone G, Andreotti P, Colombelli A, Landoni P (2020) Are social incubators different from other incubators? Evidence from Italy. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 158:120132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saraswat SK, Digalwar A, Yadav SS (2020) Development of assessment model for selection of sustainable energy source in India hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach. International conference on intelligent and fuzzy systems. Springer, Cham, pp 649–657

    Google Scholar 

  • Scuotto V, Lemaire SLL, Magni D, Maalaoui A (2022) Extending knowledge-based view: future trends of corporate social entrepreneurship to fight the gig economy challenges. J Bus Res 139:1111–1122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seda A, Ismail M (2020) Challenges facing social entrepreneurship: the implications for government policy in Egypt. Rev Econ Polit Sci 5(2):162–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sequeira J, Mueller SL, McGee JE (2007) The influence of social ties and self-efficacy in forming entrepreneurial intentions and motivating nascent behavior. J Dev Entrep 12(03):275–293

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharir M, Lerner M (2006) Gauging the success of social ventures initiated by individual social entrepreneurs. J World Bus 41(1):6–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma H, Sohani N, Yadav A (2021) Comparative analysis of ranking the lean supply chain enablers An AHP, BWM and Fuzzy SWARA based approach. Int J Qual Reliab Manag 39:2252–2271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shumate M, Atouba Y, Cooper KR, Pilny A (2014) Two paths diverged: examining the antecedents to social entrepreneurship. Manag Commun Q 28(3):404–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh S, Upadhyay SP, Powar S (2022) Developing an integrated social, economic, environmental, and technical analysis model for sustainable development using hybrid multi-criteria decision making methods. Appl Energy 308:118235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smachylo V, Khalina V, Kylnytska Y (2018) Development of the social entrepreneurship in Ukraine as an innovative form of the business. Mark Manag Innov 1:235–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith WK, Besharov ML, Wessels AK, Chertok M (2012) A paradoxical leadership model for social entrepreneurs: challenges, leadership skills, and pedagogical tools for managing social and commercial demands. Acad Manag Learn Educ 11(3):463–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanković M, Stević Ž, Das DK, Subotić M, Pamučar D (2020) A new fuzzy MARCOS method for road traffic risk analysis. Mathematics 8(3):457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stecker MJ (2014) Revolutionizing the nonprofit sector through social entrepreneurship. J Econ Issues 48(2):349–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan U, Uhlaner LM, Stride C (2015) Institutions and social entrepreneurship: the role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. J Int Bus Stud 46(3):308–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stević Ž, Vasiljević M, Zavadskas EK, Sremac S, Turskis Z (2018) Selection of carpenter manufacturer using fuzzy EDAS method. Eng Econ 29(3):281–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stević Z, Subotić M, Softić E, Božić B (2022) Multi-Criteria decision-making model for evaluating safety of road sections. J Intell Manag Decis 1(2):78–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoffers J, Gunawan A, Kleefstra A (2018) Social entrepreneurship, an international perspective. Open J Soc Sci 6(10):10–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumrit D (2022) Evaluating readiness degree for Industrial Internet of Things adoption in manufacturing enterprises under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy approach. Prod Manuf Res 10(1):226–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Teasdale S (2012) What’s in a name? Making sense of social enterprise discourses. Public Policy Adm 27(2):99–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Temple N (2017) The future of business: state of social enterprise survey 2017, Social Enterprise UK. https://sewfonline.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/09/2017-State-ofSocial-Enterprise.pdf. Accessed 05 Feb 2022

  • Terziev V, Georgiev M (2019) Current initiatives to promote social entrepreneurship in Bulgaria. IJASOS-Int E-J Adv Soc Sci 5(14):709–716

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracey P, Phillips N (2007) The distinctive challenge of educating social entrepreneurs: a postscript and rejoinder to the special issue on entrepreneurship education. Acad Manag Learn Educ 6(2):264–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turskis Z, Zavadskas EK, Antucheviciene J, Kosareva N (2015) A hybrid model based on fuzzy AHP and fuzzy WASPAS for construction site selection. Int J Comput Commun Control 10(6):113–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turskis Z, Goranin N, Nurusheva A, Boranbayev S (2019) A fuzzy WASPAS-based approach to determine critical information infrastructures of EU sustainable development. Sustainability 11(2):424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uceda MEG, Luna JLM, Lafuente JA (2017) Application of the Delphi method for the analysis of the factors determining social entrepreneurship. J Bus 9(1):43–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulutaş A, Popovic G, Radanov P, Stanujkic D, Karabasevic D (2021) A new hybrid fuzzy PSI-PIPRECIA-CoCoSo MCDM based approach to solving the transportation company selection problem. Technol Econ Dev Econ 27(5):1227–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usman S, Masood F, Khan MA, Khan NUR (2022) Impact of empathy, perceived social impact, social worth and social network on the social entrepreneurial intention in socio-economic projects. J Entrep Emerg Econ 14(4):65–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelderen M, Thurik R, Bosma N (2005) Success and risk factors in the pre-startup phase. Small Bus Econ 24(4):365–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelderen M, Thurik R, Patel P (2011) Encountered problems and outcome status in nascent entrepreneurship. J Small Bus Manag 49(1):71–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vojinović N, Stević Ž, Tanackov I (2022) A novel IMF SWARA-FDWGA-PESTEL analysis for assessment of healthcare system. Oper Res Eng Sci Theory Appl 5(1):139–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrtagić S, Softić E, Subotić M, Stević Ž, Dordevic M, Ponjavic M (2021) Ranking road sections based on MCDM model: new improved fuzzy SWARA (IMF SWARA). Axioms 10(2):92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver RL (2016) Social enterprise self-employment programs: a two-dimensional human capital investment strategy. Soc Enterp J 12(1):4–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber C, Kratzer J (2013) Social entrepreneurship, social networks and social value creation: a quantitative analysis among social entrepreneurs. Int J Entrep Ventur 5(3):217–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weerawardena J, Mort GS (2006) Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. J World Bus 41(1):21–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wronka-Pośpiech M (2018) Exploring failure among social entrepreneurs—evidence from Poland. Int J Contemp Manag 17(1):269–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao L, Huang G, Pedrycz W, Pamucar D, Martínez L, Zhang G (2022) A q-rung orthopair fuzzy decision-making model with new score function and best-worst method for manufacturer selection. Inf Sci 608:153–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalcin AS, Kilic HS, Delen D (2022) The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in business analytics: a comprehensive literature review. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 174:121193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yazdani M, Torkayesh AE, Chatterjee P, Fallahpour A, Montero-Simo MJ, Araque-Padilla RA, Wong KY (2022) A fuzzy group decision-making model to measure resiliency in a food supply chain: a case study in Spain. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 2022:101257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yel İ, Sarucan A, Baysal ME (2022) An application of fuzzy AHP, EDAS and WASPAS for the selection of process method in software projects. In: Kahraman C, Cebi S, Cevik Onar S, Oztaysi B, Tolga AC, Sari IU (eds) Intelligent and fuzzy techniques for emerging conditions and digital transformation. INFUS 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 307. Springer, Cham

  • Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra SA, Gedajlovic E, Neubaum DO, Shulman JM (2009) A typology of social entrepreneurs: motives, search processes and ethical challenges. J Bus Ventur 24(5):519–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaidi RA, Khan MM, Khan RA, Mujtaba BG (2021) Do entrepreneurship ecosystem and managerial skills contribute to startup development. South Asian J Bus Stud 2021:2398

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarbakhshnia N, Soleimani H, Ghaderi H (2018) Sustainable third-party reverse logistics provider evaluation and selection using fuzzy SWARA and developed fuzzy COPRAS in the presence of risk criteria. Appl Soft Comput 65:307–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zarch ME, Moghaddam RT, Sanej KD, Kaboli A (2021) Prioritizing the effective strategies for construction and demolition waste management using fuzzy IDOCRIW and WASPAS methods. Eng Constr Archit Manag. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-08-2020-0617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Antucheviciene J, Zakarevicius A (2012) Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektron Elektrotech 122(6):3–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Šliogerienė J, Vilutienė T (2021) An integrated assessment of the municipal buildings’ use including sustainability criteria. Sustain Cities Soc 67:102708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J (2017) Evaluating regional low-carbon tourism strategies using the fuzzy Delphi-analytic network process approach. J Clean Prod 141:409–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao H, Seibert SE, Hills GE (2005) The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. J Appl Psychol 90(6):1265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zolfani SH, Görçün ÖF, Küçükönder H (2021) Evaluating logistics villages in Turkey using hybrid improved fuzzy SWARA (IMF SWARA) and fuzzy MABAC techniques. Technol Econ Dev Econ 27(6):1582–1612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zolfani SH, Görener A, Toker K (2023) A hybrid fuzzy MCDM approach for prioritizing the solutions of resource recovery business model adoption to overcome its barriers in emerging economies. J Clean Prod 2023:137362

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their profound gratitude to the experts for their patience with this multi-step process and valuable contribution to the study.

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business Administration Department, Istanbul Commerce University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Nurgül Keleş Tayşir, Beliz Ülgen & Ali Görener

  2. International Trade Department, Istanbul Commerce University, Istanbul, Turkey

    N. Öykü İyigün

Authors
  1. Nurgül Keleş Tayşir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beliz Ülgen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Öykü İyigün
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ali Görener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Görener.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no relevant financial or non-financial competing interests to report.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were conducted in strict accordance with the ethical standards of our institutional and/or national research committee. This study also adheres to the principles outlined in the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its subsequent amendments, or equivalent ethical standards. All participants were provided with comprehensive information about the purpose of the research, the procedures involved, and their rights, including the right to withdraw at any point without any repercussions. Measures were taken to ensure the confidentiality and anonymity of the participants’ data.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Questionnaire form for expert panel to arrange the barrier in accordance with most important to least important and then assign the importance weight (An assessment of the second set of essential barriers by one of the experts is presented as an example).

See Table

Table 19 Ranking of barriers by importance and evaluation of relative significance
Full size table

19.

Appendix 2

Questionnaire to evaluate the impact of each solution on the barriers.

See Table

Table 20 Evaluating the effectiveness of solutions to overcome social entrepreneurship barriers
Full size table

20.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keleş Tayşir, N., Ülgen, B., İyigün, N.Ö. et al. A framework to overcome barriers to social entrepreneurship using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach. Soft Comput 28, 2325–2351 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-09293-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-09293-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation