Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Business models for people, planet (& profits): exploring the phenomena of social business, a market-based approach to social value creation

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article explores the hybrid phenomenon of social business, that is, both a form of organization and a practice that deliberately harnesses market dynamics to address deeply rooted social issues through the design and implementation of a core product or service. This new form of hybrid venture melds the social purpose traditionally associated with non-profit organizations with the economic purpose and market-based methods traditionally associated with for-profit firms. This exploratory research inductively explores the process by which social businesses are designed. The result suggests that clear intentionality around social purpose drives the design of these ventures and their associated missions and business models such that they can creatively synthesize competing paradigms (economic and social purpose) within one venture. The tight coupling of mission, method, and operationalization allows for the multi-stakeholder promise of the business model to be fulfilled.

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
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alboher, M. (2009). A social solution, without going the nonprofit route. The New York Times (March 5, 2009): B5.

  • Alter, S. K. (2006). Social enterprise models and their mission and money relationship. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Alter, K. (2007). Social enterprise typology. Seattle: Virtue Ventures LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, K. R. (1971). The concept of corporate strategy. Homewood: Dow-Jones Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. E. (2006). Three avenues for social entrepreneurship research. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship (pp. 22–33). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babbie, E. (2002). The basics of social research. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibility of the businessman. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, S. (1998). Social entrepreneurship: How to develop new social-purpose business ventures. Health Care Strategic Management, 16(5), 17–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C., & Ucak, S. (2006). RISE for-profit social entrepreneur report: Balancing markets and values. New York: Columbia Business School Investor’s Circle Social Venture Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, A., & Dixon S. E. A. (2006). Green-works: A model for combining social and ecological entrepreneurship. In J. Mair, J. Robinson & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship (pp. 214–234). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

  • Crane, A., McWilliams A. et al. (2008). The corporate social responsibility agenda. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Crane, A., McWilliams, A., et al. (2008). The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford University Press: Oxford.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 55–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dees, J. G. (2001). The meaning of social entrepreneurship. Retrieved February 7, 2008. http://www.caseatduke.org/documents/dees_sedef.pdf.

  • Dees, J. G., & Anderson, B. B. (2003). Sector-bending: Blurring the lines between nonprofit and for-profit. Society, 40(4), 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drayton, B. (2002). The citizen sector: Becoming as entrepreneurial and competitive as business. California Management Review, 44(3), 20–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45(4), 35–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follett, M. P. (1918). The new state. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, A. (2000). NGDOs as a moment in history: Beyond aid to social entrepreneurship or civic innovation? Third World Quarterly, 21(4), 637–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, W. C. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: Deep roots flourishing growth, promising future. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Freeman, E. R. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Marshfield: Pitman Publishing Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 32(3), 124–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, R. (2004). Social enterprise: The new economic engine. Business Strategy Review, 15(4), 39–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugh, H. (2006). Social enterprise: Beyond economic outcomes and individual returns. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship (pp. 180–206). Houndsmills: Palgrave MacMillan.

  • Hockerts, K. (2006). CafeDirect: fair trade as social entrepreneurship. In F. Perrini (Ed.), The new social entrepreneurship: What awaits social entrepreneurial ventures? (pp. 192–209). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

  • Hockerts, K. (2006). Entrepreneurial opportunity in social purpose business ventures. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship (pp. 142–154). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

  • Imperatori, B., & D. Ruta (2006). Organizing a social enterprise. In F. Perrini (Ed.), The new social entrepreneurship: What awaits social entrepreneurial ventures? (pp. 105–121). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

  • Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeuw, E. D. (1999). Healthy cities: Urban social entrepreneurship for health. Health Promotion International, 14(3), 261–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepoutre, J., Justo, R., Terjesen, S., & Bosma, N. (2011). Global entrepreneurship monitor (GEM) social entrepreneurship study: Methodology and data. Small Business Economics (This issue).

  • Light, P. C. (2008). The search for social entrepreneurship. Washington: The Brookings Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., & C. Seelos. (2006). The Sekem initiative: A holistic vision to develop people. In F. Perrini (Ed.), The new social entrepreneurship: What awaits social entrepreneurial ventures? (pp. 210–223). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., & Noboa, E. (2003). The emergence of social enterprises and their place in the new organizational landscape. Barcelona: IESE Business School, University of Navarra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mair, J., & Schoen, O. (2007). Successful social entrepreneurial business models in the context of developing economies: An explorative study. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2(1), 54–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 5, 29–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyskens, M., Carsrud, A., et al. (2008). The impact of resources on social entrepreneurship organizations: The symbiosis of entities in the social engagement network. San Antonio: United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (USASBE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, L. (1982). Approaches to explanation: Variance theory and process theory. Explaining organizational behavior. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosher-Williams, R. (2006). Research on social entrepreneurship: Understanding and contributing to an emerging field (Introduction). ARNOVA Occasional Paper Series. New York: ARNOVA.

  • Nicholls, A. (2006). Introduction: The nature of social entrepreneurship. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change (pp. 1–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Peredo, A. M., & McLean, M. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F. (2006). Social entrepreneurship domain: setting boundaries. The new social entrepreneurship: What awaits social entrepreneurial ventures? Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., & Marino, A. (2006). The basis for launching a new social entrepreneurial venture. The new social entrepreneurship: What awaits social entrepreneurial ventures?. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phills, J. A. (2005). Integrating mission and strategy for nonprofit organizations. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

  • Porter, M. (2008). The five forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 86(1), 78–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review., 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. E., Preston, L. E., et al. (2002). Redefining the corporation: Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors—For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 856–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, L. E., & Post, J. E. (1975). Private management and public policy: The principle of public responsibility. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauch, J. (2007). This is not charity. Atlantic Monthly, 300, 64–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. (2006). Introduction to part III—Understanding the strategy, structure, and outcomes in social ventures. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Ronan, W. W., & Latham, G. P. (1974). The reliability and validity of the critical incident technique: A closer look. Studies in Personnel Psychology, 6, 53–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabeti, H. (2008). The emerging fourth sector: A new sector of organizations at the intersection of the public, private, and social sectors, Fourth Sector Network. http://www.fourthsector.net/.

  • Schaltegger, S. (2002). A framework for ecopreneurship: Leading bioneers and environmental managers to ecopreneurship. Greener Management International, 38, 45–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutt, R. K. (2004). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research. Thousand Oaks: Sage/Pine Forge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisodia, R., Sheth, J., et al. (2007). Firms of endearment: How world-class companies profit from passion and purpose. Upper Saddle River: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, T. J. (2001). Methods of social research. Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers.

  • Thompson, J., Alvy, G., et al. (2000). Social entrepreneurship: A new look at the people and the potential. Management Decision, 38(5), 328–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkataraman, S. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. In J. Katz & R. Brockhaus (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence, and growth (pp. 119–138). Greenwich: JAI Press.

  • Volery, T. (2002). An entrepreneur commercializes conservation: The case of Earth Sancturies Ltd. Greener Management International, 38, 109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., & Post, J. E. (1991). Catalytic alliances for social problem solving. Human Relations, 48(8), 393–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. F. (Ed) (2008). Peace through commerce: Responsible corporate citizenship and the ideals of the United Nations Global Compact. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.

  • Wolk, A. M. (2008). Social entrepreneurship and government: A new breed of entrepreneurs developing solutions to social problems. Washington, DC: The Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).

  • Yin, R. (1984). Case study research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M. (2007). Creating a world without poverty: Social business and the future of capitalism. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the founders and current leaders of the social businesses who so generously gave their time, but most especially so generously, honestly, and thoughtfully shared their experiences and perspectives for this research. We also gratefully acknowledge Tim Hall and C.B. Bhattacharya for their guidance when this research was in its formative stages, and to Jill Avery and Paul Myers for their invaluable support and feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript. We also thank the two anonymous reviewers for their very constructive insights.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Whittemore School of Business & Economics, University of New Hampshire, McConnell Hall, 15 Academic Way, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Fiona Wilson

  2. School of Management, Boston University, 595 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA

    James E. Post

Authors
  1. Fiona Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James E. Post
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fiona Wilson.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 4.

Table 4 Additional proof quotes
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilson, F., Post, J.E. Business models for people, planet (& profits): exploring the phenomena of social business, a market-based approach to social value creation. Small Bus Econ 40, 715–737 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9401-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9401-0

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation