Research on social entrepreneurship has taken an increasing interest in issues pertaining to ideology. In contrast to existing research which tends to couch ‘ideology’ in pejorative terms (i.e., something which needs to be overcome), this paper conceives ideology as a key mechanism for rendering social entrepreneurship an object with which people can identify. Specifically, drawing on qualitative research of arguably one of the most prolific social entrepreneurship intermediaries, the global Impact Hub network, we investigate how social entrepreneurship is narrated as an ‘ideal subject,’ which signals toward others what it takes to lead a meaningful (working) life. Taking its theoretical cues from the theory of justification advanced by Boltanski, Chiapello and Thévenaut, and from recent affect-based theorizing on ideology, our findings indicate that becoming a social entrepreneur is considered not so much a matter of struggle, hardship, and perseverance but rather of ‘having fun.’ We caution that the promise of enjoyment which pervades portrayals of the social entrepreneur might cultivate a passive attitude of empty ‘pleasure’ which effectively deprives social entrepreneurship of its more radical possibilities. The paper concludes by discussing the broader implications this hedonistic rendition of social entrepreneurship has and suggests a re-politicization of social entrepreneurship through a confronting with what Slavoj Žižek calls the ‘impossible.’
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Agafonow, A. (2014). Toward a positive theory of social entrepreneurship: On maximizing versus satisficing value capture. Journal of Business Ethics, 124, 709–713.
Althusser, L. (1971). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses (notes towards an investigation). In Lenin and philosophy and other essays (pp. 127–186). London: Monthly Review Press.
Althusser, L. (2005). For Marx. New York: Verso.
Anderson, B. B., Dees, J. G., & Emerson, J. (2002). Developing viable earned income strategies. In J. G. Dees, J. Emerson, & P. Economy (Eds.), Strategic tools for social entrepreneurs: Enhancing the performance of your enterprising nonprofit (pp. 191–234). New York: Wiley.
Andersson, F. O. (2011). Social entrepreneurship as fetish. The Nonprofit Quarterly. www.nonprofitquarterly.org.
Armstrong, P. (2001). Science, enterprise and profit: Ideology in the knowledge-driven economy. Economy and Society, 30, 524–552.
Bell, D. (2000). The end of ideology: On the exhaustion of political ideas in the fifties. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Boddice, R. (2009). Forgotten antecedents: Entrepreneurship, ideology and history. In R. Ziegler (Ed.), An introduction to social entrepreneurship: Voices, preconditions, contexts (pp. 133–152). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. London: Verso.
Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification. The economies of worth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Brandstetter, L., & Lehner, O. M. (2015). Opening the market for impact investments: The need for adapted portfolio tools. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 5, 87–107.
Bröckling, U. (2002). Das unternehmerische Selbst und seine Geschlechter. Gender-Konstruktionen in Erfolgsratgebern. Leviathan, 48, 175–194.
Bull, M. (2008). Challenging tensions: critical, theoretical and empirical perspectives on social enterprise. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 14, 268–275.
Charmaz, K. (2008). Constructionism and the grounded theory method. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 397–412). New York: The Guildford Press.
Chiapello, E. (2003). Reconciling the two principal meaning of the notion of ideology: The example of the concept of the ‘spirit of capitalism’. European Journal of Social Theory, 6, 155–171.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39, 124–131.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meanings and perspectives in the research process. London: Sage.
Curtis, T. (2008). Finding that grit makes a pearl: A critical re-reading of research into social enterprise. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 14, 276–290.
Dacin, T. M., Dacin, P. A., & Tracey, P. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: A critique and future directions. Organization Science, 22, 1203–1213.
Daly, G. (2004). Introduction: Risking the impossible. In S. Žižek & G. Daly (Eds.), Conversations with Žižek (pp. 1–20). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Non-profit Management & Leadership, 14, 411–424.
Dempsey, S. E., & Sanders, M. L. (2010). Meaningful work? Nonprofit marketisation and work/life balance in popular autobiographies of social entrepreneurship. Organization, 17, 437–459.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: Praeger.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1998). The landscape of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dey, P. (2014). Governing the social through ‘social entrepreneurship’: A Foucauldian view of the ‘art of governing’ in advanced liberalism. In H. Douglas & S. Grant (Eds.), Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: Context and theories (pp. 55–72). Melbourne: Tilde University Press.
Dey, P., & Steyaert, C. (2010). The politics of narrating social entrepreneurship. Journal of Enterprising Communities, 4, 85–108.
Dey, P., & Steyaert, C. (2012). Social entrepreneurship: Critique and the radical enactment of the social. Social Enterprise Journal, 8, 90–107.
Dey, P., & Steyaert, C. (2016). Rethinking the space of ethics in social entrepreneurship: Power, subjectivity, and practices of concrete freedom. Journal of Business Ethics, 133, 627–641.
Dey, P., & Teasdale, S. (2013). ‘Social enterprise’ and dis/identification: The politics of identity work in the UK third sector. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 35, 249–271.
Dey, P., & Teasdale, S. (2015). The tactical mimicry of social enterprise strategies: Acting ‘as if’ in the everyday life of third sector organizations. Organization. doi:10.1177/1350508415570689.
Driver, M. (2012). An interview with Michael Porter: Social entrepreneurship and the transformation of capitalism. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11, 421–431.
Eikenberry, A. M. (2009). Refusing the market: A democratic discourse for voluntary and nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38, 582–596.
Eikenberry, A. M., & Kluver, J. D. (2004). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk? Public Administration Review, 64, 132–140.
Fyke, J. P., & Buzzanell, P. M. (2013). The ethics of conscious capitalism: Wicked problems in leading change and changing leaders. Human Relations, 66, 1619–1643.
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006). A postcapitalist politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Glynos, J. (2001). The grip of ideology: A Lacanian approach to the theory of ideology. Journal of Political Ideologies, 6, 191–214.
Glynos, J. (2008). Ideological fantasy at work. Journal of Political Ideologies, 13, 275–296.
Glynos, J., Klimecki, R., & Willmott, H. (2012). Cooling out the marks: The ideology and politics of the financial crisis. Journal of Cultural Economy, 5, 297–320.
Hall, S. (1982). The rediscovery of ‘ideology’: Return of the repressed in media studies. In M. Gurevitch, T. Bennett, J. Curran, & J. Woollacott (Eds.), Culture, society and the media (pp. 56–90). London: Methuen.
Hall, S., & O’Shea, A. (2013). Common-sense neoliberalism. Soundings, 55, 9–25.
Hjorth, D. (2013). Public entrepreneurship: Desiring social change, creating sociality. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 25, 34–51.
Jameson, F. (1977). Ideology, narrative analysis, and popular culture. Theory and Society, 4, 543–559.
Jones, C., & Murtola, A. M. (2012). Entrepreneurship, crisis, critique. In D. Hjorth (Ed.), Handbook of organizational entrepreneurship (pp. 116–133). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Jones, C., & Spicer, A. (2010). Unmasking the entrepreneur. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Kenny, K., & Fotaki, M. (2014). The psychosocial and organization studies: Affect at work. New York: Macmillan.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.
Lehner, O. M., & Germak, A. J. (2014). Antecedents of social entrepreneurship: Between public service motivation and the need for achievement. International Journal of Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 3, 214–229.
Lett, J. (1990). Emics and etics: Notes on the epistemology of anthropology. In T. N. Headland, K. L. Pike, & M. Harris (Eds.), Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate (pp. 127–142). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Levander, U. (2010). Social enterprise: Implication of emerging institutionalized constructions. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1, 213–230.
Mair, J., Battilana, J., & Cardenas, J. (2012). Organizing for society: A typology of social entrepreneurial models. Journal of Business Ethics, 111, 353–373.
Martin, M. (2004). Surveying social entrepreneurship: Toward an empirical analysis of the performance revolution in the social sector. St. Gallen: Center for Public Leadership.
Mason, C. (2012). Up for grabs: A critical discourse analysis of social entrepreneurship discourse in the United Kingdom. Social Enterprise Journal, 8, 123–140.
Mason, C., & Moran, M. (forthcoming). The tale of the veil: Unweaving Big Society and unweaving the social enterprise myth. In P. Dey & C. Steyaert (Eds.), Critical perspectives on social entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. In A. M. Huberman & M. B. Miles (Eds.), The qualitative researcher’s companion (pp. 37–64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McGowan, T. (2004). The end of dissatisfaction? Jacques Lacan and the emerging society of enjoyment. Albany: SUNY Press.
McMillan, C. (2012). Žižek and communist strategy: On the disavowed foundations of global capitalism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Morris, M. W., Leung, K., Ames, D., & Lickel, B. (1999). Views from inside and outside: Integrating emic and etic insights about culture and justice judgment. Academy of Management Review, 24, 781–796.
Mort, G. S., Weerawardena, J., & Carnegie, K. (2003). Social entrepreneurship: Towards conceptualization. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8, 76–88.
Moss, T. W., Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., & Lumkin, G. T. (2011). Dual identities in social ventures: An exploratory study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, 805–830.
Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34, 611–633.
Ogbor, J. O. (2000). Mythicizing and reification in entrepreneurial discourse: Ideology-critique of entrepreneurial studies. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 606–635.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Scott, D., & Teasdale, S. (2012). Whose failure? Learning from the financial collapse of a social enterprise in ‘Steeltown’. Voluntary Sector Review, 3, 139–155.
Sørensen, B. M. (2008). ‘Behold, I am making all things new’: The entrepreneur as savior in the age of creativity. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 24, 85–93.
Stavrakakis, Y. (2008). Peripheral vision subjectivity and the organized other: Between symbolic authority and fantasmatic enjoyment. Organization Studies, 29, 1037–1059.
Stavrakakis, Y. (2010). Symbolic authority, fantasmatic enjoyment and the spirits of capitalism: Genalogies of mutual engagement. In C. Cederström & C. Hoedemaekers (Eds.), Lacan and organization (pp. 59–100). London: MayFly Books.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, L. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.
VanSant, C. V., Mukesh, S., & Marmé, C. (2009). Enabling the original intent: Catalysts for social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 419–428.
Vasi, I. B. (2009). New heroes, old theories? Toward a sociological perspective on social entrepreneurship. In R. Ziegler (Ed.), An introduction to social entrepreneurship: Voices, preconditions, contexts (pp. 155–173). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Weber, M. (1988). Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Wieland, S. M. B. (2010). Ideal selves as resources for the situated practice of identity. Management Communication Quarterly, 24, 503–528.
Žižek, S. (1989). The sublime object of ideology. London: Verso.
Žižek, S. (1994). Mapping ideology. London: Verso.
Žižek, S. (1999). The ticklish subject: The absent centre of political ontology. London: Verso.
Žižek, S. (2006). The parallax view. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Žižek, S., & Badiou, A. (2005). Lacanian ink 24/25. New York: The Wooster Press.
About this article
Cite this article
Dey, P., Lehner, O. Registering Ideology in the Creation of Social Entrepreneurs: Intermediary Organizations, ‘Ideal Subject’ and the Promise of Enjoyment. J Bus Ethics 142, 753–767 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3112-z
- Social entrepreneurship
- Ideal subject
- Intermediary organizations