Phase III: Integrating Financing and Impact Logics

  • Urs JägerEmail author
  • Felipe Symmes
  • Guillermo Cardoza


Social enterprises that intend to scale through a market approach must incorporate both an impact logic and a financing logic into their organizational culture. A “logic” is a way of seeing the world. Employees of social enterprises use different logics when arguing for or against a scaling strategy—some may adhere to an impact logic, while others adhere to a financing logic. It becomes challenging for social entrepreneurs when those arguments between employees who adhere to different logics become intense, with belief standing against belief. The more social entrepreneurs intend to scale, the stronger the risk of conflicts between different logics. The reason is that the importance of the financial logic rises and, thus, so does the need to integrate this logic with the impact logic of their mission. The social entrepreneur’s challenge is to balance the social and/or environmental logic that drives the enterprise’s mission with the financing logic that enables it to scale. Social entrepreneurs work on this integration based on three elements that need to be analyzed: mission, leadership, and communication.


  1. 1.
    Chia, R. (1996). Organizational analysis as deconstructive practice. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Friedman, A., & Phillips, M. (2004). Balancing strategy and accountability: A model for the governance of professional associations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 15(2), 187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kreutzer, K., & Jäger, U. (2010). Volunteering versus managerialism: Conflict over organizational identity in voluntary associations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40, 634–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jäger, U. (2010). Managing social businesses. Mission, governance, strategy and accountability. Houndsmills and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Speckbacher, G. (2008). Nonprofit versus corporate governance: An economic approach. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 18(3), 295–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schröer, A., & Jäger, U. (2015). Beyond balancing? A research agenda on leadership in hybrid organizations. International Studies of Management and Organization, 45(3), 1–22.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jäger, U., & Beyes, T. (2010). Strategizing in NPOs. A case study on the practice of organizational change between social mission and economic rationale. Voluntas, 21(1), 82–100.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    FUNDES International. (2005). 20 years promoting SME development in Latin America. San Antonio de Belén: Stocker Group SA. October 2011.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INCAE Business School & VIVA IdeaAlajuelaCosta Rica
  2. 2.Viva IdeaSan JoséCosta Rica
  3. 3.INCAE Business SchoolAlajuelaCosta Rica

Personalised recommendations