Advertisement

Evaluating the Business Model of a Work Integration Social Enterprise in Cantabria

  • Elisa Baraibar-DiezEmail author
  • María D. Odriozola
  • Ignacio Llorente
  • José Luis Fernández Sánchez
Chapter
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)

Abstract

The uprising of new business models within the sphere of social economy has led to the appearance of the term hybrid organizations, which pursue a social mission and sustain their operations through commercial activities. In this sense, those organizations compete not only on the quality of products or services but also on the capacity to have a social and/or environmental impact. Work integration social enterprises (WISEs) represent hybrid organizations, since they are a type of social companies dedicated to help people at risk of social exclusion to join the ordinary labour market, in addition to its commercial activity. The objective of this contribution is twofold. First, it reflects the evolution and comparison of business model representations through canvases facing the appearance of new types of hybrid organizations. Second, the analysis of the business model of a WISE in Cantabria is proposed. The use of different business model representations shows how the visibility of the WISE’s information is modulated depending on the type of canvas used, so that not all of them are suitable to reflect the two purposes (social and economic) in hybrid companies.

Keywords

Work integration social enterprises WISE Social inclusion companies Social entrepreneurship Sustainable entrepreneurship Business model representations 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We thank the work integration social enterprise PLIS Servicios for the support and provision of information.

References

  1. Akina (2018) Website of Akina Foundation. Retrieved from http://akina.org.nz/news/introducing-the-social-lean-canvas/. Accessed Feb 2018
  2. Alexandros B (2016) The nonproft business model canvas [video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKkjBy9hq9U. Accessed Feb 2018
  3. Avdeev V, Ekmekjian EC (2011) The new hybrid business types: their uses and purposes. Proceedings of the northeast business & economics association, 2011, p 17Google Scholar
  4. Baraibar-Diez E, Odriozola MD, Granel Prieto E (2018) Work integration social enterprises as symbols of sustainable entrepreneurship: evidence from Spanish case studies. Int J Entrep Innov ManagGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrett R (2006) Building a values-driven organization: a whole system approach to cultural transformation. Routledge, New York, NYCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Battilana J, Sengul M, Pache AC, Model J (2015) Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: the case of work integration social enterprises. Acad Manag J 58(6):1658–1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blank S (2016) The mission model canvas – an adapted business model canvas for mission-driven organizations. Retrieved from https://steveblank.com/2016/02/23/the-mission-model-canvas-an-adapted-business-model-canvas-for-mission-driven-organizations/. Accessed Feb 2018
  8. Brandsen T, van de Donk W, Putters K (2005) Griffins or chameleons? Hybridity as a permanent and inevitable characteristic of the third sector. Int J Public Adm 28(9–10):749–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cubría I (2016) Cómo lavar un coche con dos litros de agua creando empleo al mismo tiempo. eldiario.es Cantabria, pág. NA. Retrieved from http://www.eldiario.es/norte/cantabria/sociedad/litros-creando-empleo-mismo-tiempo_0_537196927.html. Accessed March 2018
  10. Emerson J (2003) The blended value proposition: integrating social and financial returns. Calif Manag Rev 45(4):35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. George G, Bock AJ (2011) The business model in practice and its implications for entrepreneurship research. Entrep Theory Pract 35(1):83–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haigh N, Hoffman AJ (2012) Hybrid organizations: the next chapter of sustainable business. Organ Dyn 41:126–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hiller JS (2013) The benefit corporation and corporate social responsibility. J Bus Ethics 118(2):287–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ho AP, Chan K (2010) The social impact of work-integration social enterprises in Hong Kong. Int Soc Work 53(1):33–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kickul J, Janssen-Selvadurai C, Griffiths MD (2012) A blended value framework for educating the next cadre of social entrepreneurs. Acad Manag 11(3):479–493Google Scholar
  16. Morris M, Schindehutte M, Allen J (2005) The entrepreneur’s business model: toward a unified perspective. J Bus Res 58(6):726–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y, Tucci CL (2005) Clarifying business models: origins, present and future of the concept. Commun Assoc Inf Sci 16:1–25Google Scholar
  18. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2010) Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  19. Santos F, Pache AC, Birkholz C (2015) Making hybrids work: aligning business models and organizational design for social enterprises. Calif Manag Rev 57(3):36–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shafer SM, Smith HJ, Linder JC (2005) The power of business models. Bus Horiz 48(3):199–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vidal I (2005) Social enterprise and social inclusion: social enterprises in the sphere of work integration. Int J Public Adm 28(9–10):807–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zott C, Amit R, Massa L (2011) The business model: recent development and future research. J Manag 37(4):1019–1042Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisa Baraibar-Diez
    • 1
    Email author
  • María D. Odriozola
    • 1
  • Ignacio Llorente
    • 1
  • José Luis Fernández Sánchez
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CantabriaSantanderSpain

Personalised recommendations