Advertisement

Complexity, Cultural Evolution, and the Discovery and Creation of (Social) Entrepreneurial Opportunities: Exploring a Memetic Approach

  • Michael P. Schlaile
  • Marcus Ehrenberger
Chapter
Part of the FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship book series (FGFS)

Abstract

The central contribution of this chapter consists in exploring the implications of a memetic perspective for dealing with complexity in (social) entrepreneurship. The line of argument can basically be divided into four aspects. First, it is argued that memes, especially their mental representations, can be conceptualized in the context of (cultural) schemata that have an impact on the perception and discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Second, a memetic view of creativity also suggests that opportunity creation strongly depends on memes. Third, viewing social entrepreneurship as a meme(plex) allows us to compare it with related concepts. Moreover, we argue that by focusing on the properties of social entrepreneurial opportunities we can get to the core of the social entrepreneurial process. In this chapter, we are focusing on social entrepreneurial opportunities that can be understood as the intersection of the set of ‘opportunities to solve a societal problem’ and the set of ‘profitable business opportunities’. This conception represents the vantage point for the fourth part of this contribution, where we argue that, in order to facilitate the propagation of the social entrepreneurship meme within (for-profit) organizations, a systematic analysis of the firm’s social network as well as its memeplex is advisable.

Keywords

Memes Schemata (Social) Entrepreneurial opportunities Social entrepreneurship Social innovation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We have benefited from presenting earlier versions of this chapter at the 18th Annual Interdisciplinary Entrepreneurship Conference (G-Forum), November 13–14, 2014 in Oldenburg, Germany, and the European Academy of Management (EURAM) Annual Conference, June 17–20, 2015 at Kozminski University in Warsaw, Poland. We are grateful for helpful questions, criticism, and suggestions from participants of both events. Special thanks to Elisabeth Berger, Sue Blackmore, Anna Comacchio, Jameson Gill, Ilfryn Price, and four anonymous reviewers (two for EURAM, two for this book) for their valuable comments. Moreover, we would like to thank Nicholas Terry for voluntarily pointing out a couple of spelling and punctuation errors. All remaining confusion and mistakes are exclusively our own.

References

  1. Acerbi, A., & Mesoudi, A. (2015). If we are all cultural Darwinians what’s the fuss about? Clarifying recent disagreements in the field of cultural evolution. Biology & Philosophy, 30(4), 481–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahrweiler, P., Pyka, A., & Gilbert, N. (2014). Simulating knowledge dynamics in innovation networks: An introduction. In N. Gilbert, P. Ahrweiler, & A. Pyka (Eds.), Simulating knowledge dynamics in innovation networks (pp. 1–13). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Aldrich, H. E., & Kenworthy, A. L. (1999). The accidental entrepreneur: Campbellian antinomies and organizational foundings. In J. A. C. Baum & B. McKelvey (Eds.), Variations in organization science: In honor of Donald T. Campbell (pp. 19–33). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldrich, H. E., & Ruef, M. (2006). Organizations evolving (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Alvarez, S. A. (2005). Theories of entrepreneurship: Alternative assumptions and the study of entrepreneurial action. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 1(3), 105–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Discovery and creation: Alternative theories of entrepreneurial action. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1–2), 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2010). Entrepreneurship and epistemology: The philosophical underpinnings of the study of entrepreneurial opportunities. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 557–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Alvarez, S. A., Barney, J. B., & Anderson, P. (2013). Forming and exploiting opportunities: The implications of discovery and creation processes for entrepreneurial and organizational research. Organization Science, 24(1), 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ashta, A., & Hudon, M. (2012). The Compartamos microfinance IPO: Mission conflicts in hybrid institutions with diverse shareholding. Strategic Change, 21(7–8), 331–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Aunger, R. (Ed.). (2000). Darwinizing culture: The status of memetics as a science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Aunger, R. (2002). The electric meme: A new theory of how we think. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  12. Austin, J., & Reficco, E. (2009). Corporate social entrepreneurship (Working paper No. 09–101). Retrieved from Harvard Business School website http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/09-101.pdf
  13. Barrett, R. (2014). The values-driven organization: Unleashing human potential for performance and profit. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Beckmann, M., Zeyen, A., & Krzeminska, A. (2014). Mission, finance, and innovation: The similarities and differences between social entrepreneurship and social business. In A. Grove & G. A. Berg (Eds.), Social business: Theory, practice, and critical perspectives (pp. 23–41). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bedau, M. A. (2013). Minimal memetics and the evolution of patented technology. Foundations of Science, 18(4), 791–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books Doubleday.Google Scholar
  17. Blackmore, S. (1999a). The meme machine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Blackmore, S. (1999b). Meme, myself, I. New Scientist, 161(2177), 40–44.Google Scholar
  19. Blackmore, S. (2000). The meme’s eye view. In R. Aunger (Ed.), Darwinizing culture: The status of memetics as a science (pp. 25–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Blackmore, S. (2001). Evolution and memes: The human brain as a selective imitation device. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 32(1–2), 225–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Blackmore, S. (2007). Memes, minds, and imagination. In I. Roth (Ed.), Proceedings of the British academy (Imaginative minds, Vol. 147, pp. 61–78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Blackmore, S. (2010). Memetics does provide a useful way of understanding cultural evolution. In F. J. Ayala & R. Arp (Eds.), Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology (pp. 255–272). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Blute, M. (2010). Darwinian sociocultural evolution: Solutions to dilemmas in cultural and social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Breitenstein, R. (2002). Memetik und Ökonomie: Wie die Meme Märkte und Organisationen bestimmen. Münster: LIT.Google Scholar
  25. Brockhaus, R. H. (1982). The psychology of the entrepreneur (including commentary/elaboration by Y. Gasse). In C. A. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 39–71). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Brockhaus, R. H., & Horwitz, P. S. (2002). The psychology of the entrepreneur. In N. F. Krueger (Ed.), Entrepreneurship: Critical perspectives on business and management. (pp. 260–279). London: Routledge. Originally published in D. L. Sexton, & R. W. Smilor (Eds.) (1986), The art and science of entrepreneurship (pp. 25–48). Cambridge, MA: BallingerGoogle Scholar
  27. Brodie, R. (1996). Virus of the mind: The new science of the meme. Seattle, WA: Integral Press.Google Scholar
  28. Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67(6), 380–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Campbell, D. T. (1974). Evolutionary epistemology. In P. A. Schilpp (Ed.), The philosophy of Karl Popper (The library of living philosophers Vol. XIV, pp. 413–463). Lasalle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
  30. Certo, S. T., & Miller, T. (2008). Social entrepreneurship: Key issues and concepts. Business Horizons, 51(4), 267–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  32. Choi, N., & Majumdar, S. (2014). Social entrepreneurship as an essentially contested concept: Opening a new avenue for systematic future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(3), 363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cloak, F. T. (1975). Is a cultural ethology possible? Human Ecology, 3(3), 161–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Cloak, F. T. (2015). A natural science of culture; or, a neurological model of the meme and of meme replication: Version 3.2. Retrieved from http://www.tedcloak.com/a-natural-science-of-culture-32-beta.html
  35. Cole, M., & Packer, M. (2011). Culture and cognition. In K. D. Keith (Ed.), Cross-cultural psychology: Contemporary themes and perspectives (pp. 133–159). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  36. Costa, R. D. (2010). The watchman’s rattle: A radical new theory of collapse. Philadelphia, PA: Vanguard Press/Perseus Books.Google Scholar
  37. Cronk, L. (1999). That complex whole: Culture and the evolution of human behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  38. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 325–339). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1994). Memes versus genes: Notes from the culture wars. In D. H. Feldman, M. Csikszentmihalyi, & H. Gardner (Eds.), Changing the world: A framework for the study of creativity (pp. 159–175). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  40. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  41. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313–335). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Massimini, F. (1985). On the psychological selection of bio-cultural information. New Ideas in Psychology, 3(2), 115–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. D’Andrade, R. (1986). Three scientific world views and the covering law model. In D. W. Fiske & R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities (pp. 19–41). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Dacin, M. T., Dacin, P. A., & Tracey, P. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: A critique and future directions. Organization Science, 22(5), 1203–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Dawkins, R. (1993). Viruses of the mind. In B. Dahlbohm (Ed.), Dennett and his critics: Demystifying mind (pp. 13–27). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Dawkins, R. (1999). Foreword. In S. Blackmore, The meme machine (pp. vii–xvii). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Dees, J. G., & Anderson, B. B. (2006). Framing a theory of social entrepreneurship: Building on two schools of practice and thought. ARNOVA Occasional Paper Series, 1(3), 39–66.Google Scholar
  49. Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2014). The EMES approach of social enterprise in a comparative perspective. In J. Defourny, L. Hulgard, & V. Pestoff (Eds.), Social enterprise and the third sector (pp. 17–41). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Delius, J. D. (1991). The nature of culture. In M. S. Dawkins, T. R. Halliday, & R. Dawkins (Eds.), The Tinbergen legacy (pp. 75–99). London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  51. Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Boston, MA: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  52. Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meaning of life. London: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  53. Dennett, D. C. (2001). The evolution of evaluators. In A. Nicita & U. Pagano (Eds.), The evolution of economic diversity (pp. 66–81). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. Dennett, D. C. (2002). The new replicators. In M. Pagel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evolution (Vol. 1, pp. E83–E92). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Dennett, D. C. (2003). Freedom evolves. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
  56. Dennett, D. C. (2007). Dangerous memes [Transcript and subtitles]. Transcript available from http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_dangerous_memes/transcript. Video file available from http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_dennett_on_dangerous_memes, filmed 2002, posted 2007.
  57. Dennett, D. C. (2011). The evolution of culture. Originally published on edge.org, Feb. 1999: https://edge.org/conversation/the-evolution-of-culture. Reprinted in J. Brockman (Ed.), Culture: Leading scientists explore societies, art, power, and technology (pp. 1–26). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
  58. DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Distin, K. (2005). The selfish meme: A critical reassessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Dopfer, K., & Potts, J. (2004). Evolutionary realism: A new ontology for economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 11(2), 195–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Drucker, P. F. (1984). The new meaning of corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 26(2), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Dunbar, R. I. M. (1993). Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(4), 681–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Dunbar, R. I. M. (1998). The social brain hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology, 6(5), 178–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Dunbar, R. I. M. (2011). Constraints on the evolution of social institutions and their implications for information flow. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(3), 345–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Dyson, F. (2004). Origins of life (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Endres, A. M., & Woods, C. R. (2007). The case for more “subjectivist” research on how entrepreneurs create opportunities. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 13(4), 222–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Fichter, K. (2012). Innovation communities: A new concept for new challenges. In K. Fichter & S. Beuckert (Eds.), Innovation communities: Teamworking of key persons—a succes factor in radical innovation (pp. 1–15). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Fillis, I., & Rentschler, R. (2010). The role of creativity in entrepreneurship. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 18(1), 49–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Flechsig, K.-H. (1998). Kulturelle Schemata und interkulturelles Lernen. Interne Arbeitspapiere des Instituts für Interkulturelle Didaktik, 3. Retrieved from http://wwwuser.gwdg.de/~kflechs/iikdiaps3-98.htm
  70. Flechsig, K.-H. (2006). Beiträge zum Interkulturellen Training. Göttingen: Institut für Interkulturelle Didaktik e.V.Google Scholar
  71. Frobenius, L. (1921). Paideuma: Umrisse einer Kultur- und Seelenlehre. Munich: C.H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
  72. Fuchs, S. (2001). Beyond agency. Sociological Theory, 19(1), 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Fuglsang, L. (2008). Innovation with care: What it means. In L. Fuglsang (Ed.), Innovation and the creative process: Towards innovation with care (pp. 3–21). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Fürst, M. (2014). Opening the door to opportunities: How to design CR Strategies that optimize impact for business and society. In C. Weidinger, F. Fischler, & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Sustainable entrepreneurship: Business success through sustainability (pp. 155–174). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Gell-Mann, M. (1997). The simple and the complex. In D. S. Alberts & T. J. Czerwinski (Eds.), Complexity, global politics, and national security (pp. 2–12). Washington, DC: National Defense University. Retrieved from http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Complexity_Global.pdf.Google Scholar
  76. Gers, M. (2008). The case for memes. Biological Theory, 3(4), 305–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Gilbert, N. (1997). A simulation of the structure of academic science. Sociological Research Online, 2(2), 3. Full text available from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/2/3.html (no pagination).
  78. Gilbert, N., Ahrweiler, P., & Pyka, A. (Eds.). (2014). Simulating knowledge dynamics in innovation networks. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  79. Gill, J. (2012). An extra-memetic empirical methodology to accompany theoretical memetics. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 20(3), 323–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2009). Darwinian populations and natural selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Hansen, D. J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Hills, G. E. (2011). A multidimensional examination of a creativity-based opportunity recognition model. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17(5), 515–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530.Google Scholar
  83. Hayward, M., Shepherd, D. A., & Griffin, D. (2006). A hubris theory of entrepreneurship. Management Science, 52(2), 160–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Heylighen, F., & Chielens, K. (2009). Evolution of culture, memetics. In R. A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science (pp. 3205–3220). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Hills, G. E., Shrader, R. C., & Lumpkin, G. T. (1999). Opportunity recognition as a creative process. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research (Online publication). Retrieved from http://fusionmx.babson.edu/entrep/fer/papers99/X/X_A/X_A.html
  86. Hodgson, G. M., & Knudsen, T. (2010). Generative replication and the evolution of complexity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 75(1), 12–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  88. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  89. Hoogendoorn, B., Pennings, E., & Thurik, R. (2010). What do we know about social entrepreneurship: An analysis of empirical research. International Review of Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 71–112.Google Scholar
  90. Hudon, M., & Ashta, A. (2013). Fairness and microcredit interest rates. From Rawlsian principles of justice to the distribution of bargaining range. Business Ethics: A European Review, 22(3), 277–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Hudon, M., & Sandberg, J. (2013). The ethical crisis in microfinance: Issues, findings, and implications. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(4), 561–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Hull, D. L. (1982). The naked meme. In H. C. Plotkin (Ed.), Learning, development, and culture: Essays in evolutionary epistemology (pp. 273–327). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  93. Hull, D. L. (1988a). Science as a process: An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Hull, D. L. (1988b). Interactors versus vehicles. In H. C. Plotkin (Ed.), The role of behavior in evolution (pp. 19–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  95. Jamali, D. (2007). The case for strategic corporate social responsibility in developing countries. Business and Society Review, 112(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Johannessen, J. A., & Olsen, B. (2010). The future of value creation and innovations: Aspects of a theory of value creation and innovation in a global knowledge economy. International Journal of Information Management, 30(6), 502–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Johnson, S. J. (2013). Memetic theory, trademarks & the viral meme mark. The John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law, 13(1), 96–129.Google Scholar
  98. Kappelhoff, P. (2012). Selektionsmodi der Organisationsgesellschaft: Gruppenselektion und Memselektion. In S. Duschek, M. Gaitanides, W. Matiaske, & G. Ortmann (Eds.), Organisationen regeln: Die Wirkmacht korporativer Akteure (pp. 131–162). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Karafiath, B. L. (2014). 10 rules of memetic marketing: A surprising journey into the world of memes [Presentation slides]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/culture2inc/10-rules-of-memetic-marketing
  100. Karafiath, B. L., & Brewer, J. (n.d.). Culture design 101: An introduction to our meme research method [Presentation slides]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/culture2inc/culture-design-101
  101. KEA. (2009). The impact of culture on creativity: A study prepared for the European Commission. Retrieved from http://www.keanet.eu/docs/impactculturecreativityfull.pdf
  102. Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  103. Kirzner, I. M. (1979). Perception, opportunity and profit: Studies in the theory of entrepreneurship. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  104. Kirzner, I. M. (2009). The alert and creative entrepreneur: A clarification. Small Business Economics, 32(2), 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Kistruck, G. M., & Beamish, P. W. (2010). The interplay of form, structure, and embeddedness in social intrapreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4), 735–761.Google Scholar
  106. Kronfeldner, M. (2011). Darwinian creativity and memetics. Durham: Acumen.Google Scholar
  107. Leigh, H. (2010). Genes, memes, culture, and mental illness: Toward an integrative model. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Light, P. (2008). The search for social entrepreneurship. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  109. Lord, A. S. (2012). Reviving organisational memetics through cultural Linnæanism. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 20(3), 349–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Luhmann, N. (2012). Theory of society (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Luhmann, N. (2013). Theory of society (Vol. 2). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Lumpkin, G. T., Hills, G. E., & Shrader, R. C. (2004). Opportunity recognition. In H. P. Welsch (Ed.), Entrepreneurship: The way ahead (pp. 73–90). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  114. Lumpkin, G. T., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2005). The role of organizational learning in the opportunity-recognition process. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 451–472.Google Scholar
  115. Lundström, A., Zhou, C., von Friedrichs, Y., & Sundin, E. (Eds.). (2014). Social entrepreneurship: Leveraging economic, political, and cultural dimensions. International studies in entrepreneurship (Vol. 29). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  116. Lynch, A. (1996). Thought contagion: How belief spreads through society. The new science of memes. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  117. Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Marsden, P. (1998). Memetics: A new paradigm for understanding customer behaviour and influence. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 16(6), 363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Marsden, P. (2002). Brand positioning: Meme’s the word. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 20(5), 307–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social Entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 5(2), 27–39.Google Scholar
  121. McKelvey, B. (2004). Toward a complexity science of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(3), 313–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. McNamara, A. (2011). Can we measure memes? Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience, 3(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
  123. Menger, C. (1871). Principles of economics. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  124. Mesoudi, A., Whiten, A., & Laland, K. N. (2006). Towards a unified science of cultural evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29(4), 329–383.Google Scholar
  125. Müller, S. S. W. (2010). Theorien sozialer Evolution. Zur Plausibilität darwinistischer Erklärungen sozialen Wandels. Bielefeld: Transcript.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  127. Newbert, S. L., & Hill, R. P. (2014). Setting the stage for paradigm development: A “small-tent” approach to social entrepreneurship. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 5(3), 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4), 611–633.Google Scholar
  129. Osburg, T. (2014). Sustainable entrepreneurship: A driver for social innovation. In C. Weidinger, F. Fischler, & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Sustainable entrepreneurship: Business success through sustainability (pp. 103–116). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Osburg, T., & Schmidpeter, R. (Eds.). (2013). Social innovation: Solutions for a sustainable future. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  131. Patzelt, W. J. (2015a). Was ist “Memetik”? In B. P. Lange & S. Schwarz (Eds.), Die menschliche Psyche zwischen Natur und Kultur (pp. 52–61). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  132. Patzelt, W. J. (2015b). Der Schichtenbau der Wirklichkeit im Licht der Memetik. In B. P. Lange & S. Schwarz (Eds.), Die menschliche Psyche zwischen Natur und Kultur (pp. 170–181). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  133. Paull, J. (2009). Meme maps: A tool for configuring memes in time and space. European Journal of Scientific Research, 31(1), 11–18.Google Scholar
  134. Pech, R. J. (2003). Memetics and innovation: Profit through balanced meme management. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Pech, R. J., & Slade, B. (2004). Memetic engineering: A framework for organisational diagnosis and development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(5), 452–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Petrella, F., & Richez-Battesti, N. (2014). Social entrepreneur, social entrepreneurship and social enterprise: Semantics and controversies. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 2(14), 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), 34–43.Google Scholar
  138. Pol, E., & Ville, S. (2009). Social innovation: Buzz word or enduring term? Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(6), 878–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  140. Porter, M. E., & Driver, M. (2012). An interview with Michael Porter: Social entrepreneurship and the transformation of capitalism. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(3), 421–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 85(12), 78–92.Google Scholar
  142. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. How to reinvent capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77.Google Scholar
  143. Prahalad, C. K. (2004). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  144. Prahalad, C. K., & Hammond, A. (2002). Serving the world’s poor profitably. Harvard Business Review, 80(9), 48–57.Google Scholar
  145. Price, I. (1995). Organizational memetics? Organizational learning as a selection process. Management Learning, 26(3), 299–318.Google Scholar
  146. Price, I. (2009). Space to adapt: workplaces, creative behaviour and organizational memetics. In T. Rickards, M. A. Runco, & S. Moger (Eds.), The Routledge companion to creativity (pp. 46–57). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  147. Price, I. (2012). Organizational ecologies and declared realities. In K. Alexander & I. Price (Eds.), Managing organizational ecologies: Space, management and organization (pp. 11–22). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  148. Pyper, H. S. (1998). The selfish text: The Bible and memetics. In J. C. Exum & S. D. Moore (Eds.), Biblical studies/cultural studies: The third Sheffield colloquium (pp. 70–90). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.Google Scholar
  149. Quinn, N., & Holland, D. (1987). Culture and cognition. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 3–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  151. Ragin, C. C. (2008). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Ragin, C. C. (2014). The comparative method. Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Originally published 1987.Google Scholar
  153. Reed, L. R. (with Marsden, J., Ortega, A., Rivera, C., & Rogers, S.) (2014). Resilience: The state of the Microcredit Summit Campaign report, 2014. Washington, DC: Microcredit Summit Campaign.Google Scholar
  154. Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. (Eds.). (2009). Configurational comparative methods. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  155. Rüede, D., & Lurtz, K. (2012). Mapping the various meanings of social innovation. Towards a differentiated understanding of an emerging concept. EBS Business School Research Paper, 12(3), 1–52.Google Scholar
  156. Sandel, M. (2012). What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  157. Santos, F. M. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 335–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263.Google Scholar
  159. Sarasvathy, S. D., Dew, N., Velamuri, S. R., & Venkataraman, S. (2010). Three views of entrepreneurial opportunity. In Z. J. Acs & D. B. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research: An interdisciplinary survey and introduction (2nd ed., pp. 77–96). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  161. Schlaile, M. P. (2012). Global Leadership im Kontext ökonomischer Moralkulturen—eine induktiv-komparative Analyse (Hohenheimer Working Papers zur Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik Nr. 13). Retrieved from University of Hohenheim publication server: https://opus.uni-hohenheim.de/volltexte/2013/812/pdf/hhwpwue_13_Schlaile.pdf
  162. Schlaile, M. P. (2013). A ‘more evolutionary’ approach to economics: The Homo sapiens oeconomicus and the utility maximizing meme. Paper presented at the 11th Globelics International Conference: Entrepreneurship, innovation policy and development in an era of increased globalisation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.Google Scholar
  163. Schmidpeter, R., & Weidinger, C. (2014). Linking business and society: An overview. In C. Weidinger, F. Fischler, & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Sustainable entrepreneurship: Business success through sustainability (pp. 1–11). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Schneider, C. Q., & Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: A guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Schumpeter, J. A. (1994). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. London: Routledge. Originally published 1942.Google Scholar
  166. Shane, S. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship: The individual-opportunity nexus. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.Google Scholar
  168. Shennan, S. (2002). Genes, memes and human history: Darwinian archaeology and cultural evolution. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  169. Shennan, S. (2012). Descent with modification and the archaeological record. In A. Whiten, R. A. Hinde, C. B. Stringer, & K. N. Laland (Eds.), Culture evolves (pp. 233–250). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  170. Shepherd, J., & McKelvey, B. (2009). An empirical investigation of organizational memetic variation. Journal of Bioeconomics, 11(2), 135–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in a digital world: Reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(3), 362–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in digital culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  173. Short, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(2), 161–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Simonton, D. K. (1999). Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  175. Smith, E. R., & Queller, S. (2003). Mental representations. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes (pp. 112–133). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  176. Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3), 407–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Speel, H.-C. (1998). Memes are also interactors. In J. Ramaekers (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th international congress on cybernetics (pp. 402–407). Namur: Association Internationale de Cybernétique.Google Scholar
  178. Speel, H.-C. (1999). Memetics: On a conceptual framework for cultural evolution. In F. Heylighen, J. Bollen, & A. Riegler (Eds.), The evolution of complexity. The violet book of ‘Einstein meets Magritte’. (pp. 229–254). Brussels: VUB University Press and Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  179. Spengler, O. (1926). The decline of the West. Form and actuality (Trans. with notes by C. F. Atkinson). New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  180. Sperber, D. (1996). Explaining culture: A naturalistic approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  181. Spitzberg, B. H. (2014). Toward a model of meme diffusion (M3D). Communication Theory, 24(3), 311–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Stilgoe, J., Owen, P., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Taillard, M., & Giscoppa, H. (2013). Psychology and modern warfare. Idea management in conflict and competition. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  184. Tyler, T. (2011, May 31). Intracranial memetics and intercranial memetics [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://on-memetics.blogspot.de/2011/05/intracranial-memetics-and-intercranial.html
  185. Unilever (2013). Unilever sustainable living plan: Indian progress 2013. Retrieved from http://www.hul.co.in/Images/USLP-India2013ProgressReport_tcm114-241468.pdf
  186. Voelpel, S. C., Leibold, M., & Streb, C. K. (2005). The innovation meme: Managing innovation replicators for organizational fitness. Journal of Change Management, 5(1), 57–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Volkmann, C. K., Tokarski, K. O., & Ernst, K. (Eds.). (2012). Social entrepreneurship and social business: An introduction and discussion with case studies. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.Google Scholar
  188. von Bülow, C. (2013). Meme [English translation of the (German) article “Mem”. In J. Mittelstraß (Ed.), Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie (2nd ed., Vol. 5., pp. 318–324). Stuttgart: Metzler Verlag]. Retrieved from http://www.uni-konstanz.de/philosophie/files/meme.pdf
  189. von Mises, L. (1998). Human action: A treatise on economics. The scholar’s edition. Originally published 1949. Auburn, AL: Bettina Bien Greaves/The Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar
  190. von Schomberg, R. (2013). A vision of responsible research and innovation. In R. Owen, M. Heintz, & J. Bessant (Eds.), Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 51–74). London: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Vos, E., & Kelleher, B. (2001). Mergers and takeovers: A memetic approach. Journal of Memetics—Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 5. Full text available from http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/2001/vol5/vos_e&kelleher_b.html
  192. Weeks, J., & Galunic, C. (2003). A theory of the cultural evolution of the firm: The intra-organizational ecology of memes. Organization Studies, 24(8), 1309–1352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. Wegener, F. (2009). Memetik. Der Krieg des neuen Replikators gegen den Menschen (2nd ed.). Gladbeck: Kulturförderverein Ruhrgebiet e.V.Google Scholar
  194. Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  195. Weidinger, C., Fischler, F., & Schmidpeter, R. (Eds.). (2014). Sustainable entrepreneurship. Business success through sustainability. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  196. Wickler, W. (2006). 30 Jahre “Das egoistische Gen”—eine Einführung. In R. Dawkins (2007), Das egoistische Gen (pp. 11–17). Heidelberg: Spektrum.Google Scholar
  197. Wilkins, D. J., & Hull, D. L. (2014). Replication and reproduction. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/replication/
  198. Williams, R. (2000). The business of memes: Memetic possibilities for marketing and management. Management Decision, 38(4), 272–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. Williams, R. (2002). Memetics: A new paradigm for understanding customer behaviour? Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 20(3), 162–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. Williams, R. (2004). Management fashions and fads: Understanding the role of consultants and managers in the evolution of ideas. Management Decision, 42(6), 769–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. Wimsatt, W. C. (2010). Memetics does not provide a useful way of understanding cultural evolution: A developmental perspective. In F. J. Ayala & R. Arp (Eds.), Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology (pp. 273–291). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  202. Wood, M. S., & McKinley, W. (2010). The production of entrepreneurial opportunity: A constructivist perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(1), 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. Yates, B. F., & Horvath, C. L. (2013). Social license to operate: How to get it, and how to keep it (Working paper). Retrieved from National Bureau of Asian Research website: http://www.nbr.org/downloads/pdfs/eta/PES_2013_summitpaper_Yates_Horvath.pdf
  204. Yunus, M. (2003). Banker of the poor: The story of the Grameen Bank. London: Aurum Press.Google Scholar
  205. Yunus, M. (2011). Building social business: The new kind of capitalism that serves humanity’s most pressing needs. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  206. Yunus, M., Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 308–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  207. Yunus, M. (with Weber, K.) (2007). Creating a world without poverty: Social business and the future of capitalism. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business Ethics, Institute of Economic and Business Education (560)University of HohenheimStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Konstanz Institute of Corporate Governance (KICG)Hochschule Konstanz University of Applied Sciences (HTWG)ConstanceGermany

Personalised recommendations