Skip to main content

A Resource-Based View of Social Entrepreneurship: How Stewardship Culture Benefits Scale of Social Impact

Journal of Business Ethics volume 152, pages 589–611 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

Despite efforts to address societal ills, social enterprises face challenges in increasing their impact. Drawing from the RBV, we argue that a social enterprise’s scale of social impact depends on its capabilities to engage stakeholders, attract government support, and generate earned-income. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 171 US-based social enterprises and find support for the hypothesized relationships between these organizational capabilities and scale of social impact. Further, we find that these relationships are contingent upon stewardship culture. Specifically, we show that an entrepreneur-centered stewardship culture increases the effects of the capabilities to attract government support and to generate earned-income, while an employee-centered stewardship culture compensates for low abilities to attract government support and to generate earned-income.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2014). Entrepreneurial opportunities and poverty alleviation. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1), 159–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvord, S. H., Brown, D. L., & Letts, C. W. (2004). Social entrepreneurship and societal transformation: An exploratory study. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(3), 260–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 30(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacq, S., Hartog, C., & Hoogendoorn, B. (2016). Beyond the moral portrayal of social entrepreneurs: An empirical approach to who they are and what drives them. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 703–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacq, S., & Janssen, F. (2011). The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23(5/6), 373–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacq, S., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2014). Can social entrepreneurship researchers learn from family business scholarship? A theory-based future research agenda. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 5(3), 270–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barendsen, L., & Gardner, H. (2004). Is the social entrepreneur a new type of leader? Leader to Leader, 2004(34), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., & Ferguson, M. J. (2000). Beyond behaviorism: On the automaticity of higher mental processes. Psychological Bulletin, 126(6), 925–945.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battilana, J., Sengul, M., Pache, A.-C., & Model, J. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: The case of work integration social enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, G. G., & Dyck, B. (2011). Conventional resource-based theory and its radical alternative: A less materialist-individualist approach to strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Ner, A., Ren, T., & Paulson, D. F. (2011). A sectoral comparison of wage levels and wage inequality in human services industries. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly. Advance online publication, 40(4), 608–633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, P., & Chatterji, A. (2009). Scaling social entrepreneurial impact. California Management Review, 51(3), 114–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, P., & Smith, B. (2010). Identifying the drivers of social entrepreneurial impact: Theoretical development and an exploratory empirical test of SCALERS. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 126–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddewyn, J. J., & Brewer, T. L. (1994). International-business political behavior: New theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 119–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschee, J. (1995). Some nonprofits are not only thinking about the unthinkable, they’re doing it—Running a profit. Across the Board, the Magazine of the Conference Board (March).

  • Boschee, J. (2001). Eight basic principles for nonprofit entrepreneurs. Nonprofit World (July–August), 15–18

  • Boschee, J. (2006). The single greatest challenge: Existing organizational culture is frequently the biggest obstacle for social entrepreneurs. The Institute for Social Entrepreneurs.

  • Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 111–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandenburger, A. M., & Nalebuff, B. J. (1996). Co-opetition: A revolutionary mindset that combines competition and cooperation in the marketplace. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branzei, O. (2012). Social change agency under adversity: How relational processes (re)produce hope in hopeless settings. In K. Golden-Biddle & J. E. Dutton (Eds.), Using a positive lens to explore social change and organizations: Building a theoretical and research foundation (pp. 21–47). New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S. J., van Witteloostuijn, A., & Eden, L. (2010). From the Editors: Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 178–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K. K., Lune, H., & Queen, E. L. (2013). How values shape and are shaped by nonprofit and voluntary organizations the current state of the field. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(5), 856–885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colbert, B. A. (2004). The complex resource-based view: Implications for theory and practice in strategic human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 341–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta, G., & Salvato, C. (2004). Self-serving or self-actualizing? Models of man and agency costs in different types of family firms. A commentary on “Comparing the agency costs of family and non‐family firms: Conceptual issues and exploratory evidence”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 355–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corner, P. D., & Ho, M. (2010). How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(4), 635–659.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. (1991). Entrepreneurial versus conservative firms: A comparison of strategies and performance. Journal of Management Studies, 28(5), 439–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, P. A., Dacin, M. T., & Matear, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: Why we don’t need a new theory and how we move forward from here. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dart, R. (2004). Being “business-like” in a nonprofit organization: A grounded and inductive typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(2), 290–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., Allen, M., & Hayes, H. (2010). Is blood thicker than water? A study of stewardship perceptions in family business. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(6), 1093–1116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., Frankforter, S., Vollrath, D., & Hill, V. (2007). An empirical test of stewardship theory. Journal of Business and Leadership: Research, Practice, & Teaching, 3(1), 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., Schoorman, F., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dees, G. (1998). The meaning of “social entrepreneurship”. Kauffman Foundation, Working paper.

  • Dees, G. (2008). Developing the field of social entrepreneurship. Report from the Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship, Duke University, Durham, NC.

  • Desa, G., & Basu, S. (2013). Optimization or bricolage? Overcoming resource constraints in global social entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(1), 26–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desa, G., & Koch, J. L. (2014). Scaling social impact: Building sustainable social ventures at the base-of-the-pyramid. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 146–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detert, J. R., Schroeder, R. G., & Mauriel, J. J. (2000). A framework for linking culture and improvement initiatives in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 850–863.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development—theory and applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(4), 681–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 417–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 81–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2014). What Impact? A framework for measuring the scale and scope of social performance. California Management Review, 56(3), 118–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddleston, K. A. (2008). The prequel to family firm culture and stewardship: The leadership perspective of the founder. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32(6), 1055–1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddleston, K. A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 547–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W. & Kidwell, R. E. (2016). Managing family members: How monitoring and collaboration affect extra-role behavior in family firms. Human Resource Management (in press).

  • Eddleston, K. A., Kellermanns, F. W., & Sarathy, R. (2008). Resource configuration in family firms: Linking resources, strategic planning and technological opportunities to performance. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 26–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations. World Development, 24(6), 961–973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flatten, T. C., Engelen, A., Möller, T., & Brettel, M. (2015). How entrepreneurial firms profit from pricing capabilities: An examination of technology-based ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 39(5), 1111–1136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frynas, J. G., Mellahi, K., & Pigman, G. A. (2006). First mover advantages in international business and firm-specific political resources. Strategic Management Journal, 27(4), 321–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Götz, O., Liehr-Gobbers, K., & Krafft, M. (2009). Evaluation of structural equation models using the partial least squares (PLS) approach. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 691–712). Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gras, D., & Mendoza-Abarca, K. I. (2014). Risky business? The survival implications of exploiting commercial opportunities by nonprofits. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(3), 392–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (1981). Strategic awareness within top management teams. Strategic Management Journal, 2(3), 263–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugh, H. (2007). Community-led social venture creation. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 31(2), 161–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugh, H., & Talwar, A. (2016). Linking social entrepreneurship and social change: The mediating role of empowerment. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 643–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemingway, C. A. (2005). Personal values as a catalyst for corporate social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(3), 233–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander, B. S., & Elman, N. S. (1988). Family-owned businesses: An emerging field of inquiry. Family Business Review, 1(2), 145–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard-Grenville, J. A., & Hoffman, A. J. (2003). The importance of cultural framing to the success of social initiatives in business. Academy of Management Perspectives, 17(2), 70–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeavons, T. H. (1994). Stewardship revisited: Secular and sacred views of governance and management. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23(2), 107–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M., Felps, W., & Bigley, G. A. (2007). Ethical theory and stakeholder-related decisions: The role of stakeholder culture. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanuk, L., & Berenson, C. (1975). Mail surveys and response rate: A literature review. Journal of Marketing Research, 12(4), 440–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, K. S. (2001). Stewardship: The fifth step in the public relations process. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 279–290). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kickul, J., & Lyons, T. S. (2015). Financing social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 5(2), 83–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kickul, J., & Lyons, T. S. (2016). Understanding social entrepreneurship: The relentless pursuit of mission in an ever changing world. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan, R., Martin, X., & Noorderhaven, N. (2006). When does trust matter to alliance performance? Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 894–917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litz, R. A. (1996). A resource-based-view of the socially responsible firm: Stakeholder interdependence, ethical awareness, and issue responsiveness as strategic assets. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(12), 1355–1363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomax, R. G. (1992). Statistical concepts: A second course for education and the behavioral sciences. White Plains: Longman Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • London, T. (2008). The base-of-the-pyramid perspective: A new approach to poverty alleviation. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2008(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., Moss, T. W., Gras, D. M., Kato, S., & Amezcua, A. S. (2013). Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: How are they different, if at all? Small Business Economics, 40(3), 761–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., & Martí, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C. & Park, P. (2014). Inside the buy-one give-one model. Stanford Social Innovation Review (Winter), 28–33.

  • Mathews, J. A. (2002). A resource-based view of Schumpeterian economic dynamics. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12(1), 29–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCambridge, R. (2004). Underestimating the power of nonprofit governance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(2), 346–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyskens, M., Robb-Post, C., Stamp, J., Carsrud, A., & Reynolds, P. (2010). Social ventures from a resource-based perspective: An exploratory study assessing global Ashoka Fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(4), 661–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Scholnick, B. (2008). Stewardship vs. stagnation: An empirical comparison of small family and non-family businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 51–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T. L., & Wesley, C. L. (2010). Assessing mission and resources for social change: An Organizational identity perspective on social venture capitalists’ decision criteria. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34(4), 705–733.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minkoff, D. C., & Powell, W. W. (2006). Nonprofit mission: Constancy, responsiveness, or deflection? In W. W. Powell & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook (2nd ed., pp. 591–611). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, A. W., Dacin, P. A., & Dacin, M. T. (2012). Collective social entrepreneurship: Collaboratively shaping social good. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 375–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubaum, D. O., Mitchell, M. S., & Marshall, S. (2004). Firm newness, entrepreneurial orientation, and ethical climate. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(4), 335–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nga, J. K. H., & Shamuganathan, G. (2010). The influence of personality traits and demographic factors on social entrepreneurship start up intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 259–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2008). The paradox of greater NGO accountability: A case study of Amnesty Ireland. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(7), 801–824.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim, A. N. (1966). Questionnaire design and attitude measurement. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J. A., & Doh, J. P. (2005). The high impact of collaborative social initiatives. Sloan Management Review, 46(3), 30–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pless, N. M. (2012). Social entrepreneurship in theory and practice—An introduction. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 317–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavior research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramahi, T. K. (2012). Aravind Eye Hospitals: Features of organizational culture enhancing performance for the bottom of the pyramid. MSc Thesis, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.

  • Renko, M. (2013). Early challenges of nascent social entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 37(5), 1045–1069.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, F. M. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 335–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J. A. (2013). Comparing stewardship across religions. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(3), 517–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 729–753.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, E., & Carter, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: Theoretical antecedents and empirical analysis of entrepreneurial processes and outcomes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(3), 418–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, J., Moss, T., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(2), 161–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. R., Kistruck, G. M., & Cannatelli, B. (2016). The impact of moral intensity and desire for control on scaling decisions in social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 677–689.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, U., Uhlaner, L., & Stride, C. (2015). Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(3), 308–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sud, M., VanSandt, C. V., & Baugous, A. M. (2009). Social entrepreneurship: The role of institutions. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(1), 201–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. (2003). Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 397–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surroca, J., Tribo, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, L. A., & Zhang, D. D. (2010). The social entrepreneurship zone. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 22(2), 71–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, W., Williams, J., & Tan, T. (2005). Defining the ‘social’ in ‘social entrepreneurship’: Altruism and entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(3), 353–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosi, H. L., Brownlee, A. L., Silva, P., & Katz, J. P. (2003). An empirical exploration of decision-making under agency controls and stewardship structure. Journal of Management Studies, 40(8), 2053–2071.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., Sapienza, H. J., & Villanueva, J. (2007). Entrepreneurial pursuits of self- and collective interests. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(3–4), 353–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Puyvelde, S., Caers, R., Du Bois, C., & Jegers, M. (2012). The governance of nonprofit organizations integrating agency theory with stakeholder and stewardship theories. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(3), 431–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, C., Kroeger, A. & Lambrich, K. (2012). Scaling social enterprises—a theoretically grounded framework. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 32(19), Article 3.

  • Weerawardena, J., & Mort, G. S. (2006). Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M. (2003). Halving poverty by 2015—we can actually make it happen. The Round Table, 92(370), 363–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., Neubaum, D. O., Dibrell, C., & Craig, J. (2008). Culture of family commitment and strategic flexibility: The moderating effect of stewardship. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32(6), 1035–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., & Salvato, C. (2004). Entrepreneurship in family vs. non-family firms: A resource-based analysis of the effect of organizational culture. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 28(6), 363–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Newey, L. R., & Li, Y. (2014). On the frontiers: The implications of social entrepreneurship for international entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(1), 137–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, D. D., & Swanson, L. A. (2013). Social entrepreneurship in nonprofit organizations: An empirical investigation of the synergy between social and business objectives. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 25(1), 105–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, M. (2009). The business of giving: TOMS Shoes. Success. Retrieved October 2, 2014 from http://www.success.com/article/the-business-of-giving-toms-shoes.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank our editor and two anonymous reviewers for their developmental feedback and guidance. We are grateful to Tom Lumpkin for very helpful comments and suggestions on an earlier draft. We also benefited from presenting previous versions of this paper at the 2014 Annual Conference of the Strategic Management Society, and the 2015 Annual Conference of the United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship, where the paper was awarded Best Paper in Public Policy. Kimberly Eddleston gratefully acknowledges the support provided by the Schulze Foundation and the Daniel and Dorthy Grady Fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. D’Amore-McKim School of Business, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115-5000, USA

    Sophie Bacq & Kimberly A. Eddleston

Authors
  1. Sophie Bacq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kimberly A. Eddleston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sophie Bacq.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bacq, S., Eddleston, K.A. A Resource-Based View of Social Entrepreneurship: How Stewardship Culture Benefits Scale of Social Impact. J Bus Ethics 152, 589–611 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3317-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3317-1

Keywords

  • Social enterprises
  • Resource-based view
  • Stewardship
  • Scale of social impact