Industry Expertise (1)
Areas of Expertise (6)
Universite Catholique de Louvain: Ph.D., Entrepreneurship/Entrepreneurial Studies 2012
Hybrid organizations: origins, strategies, impacts, and implicationsCalifornia Management Review
2015 This introduction to the special issue on hybrid organizations defines hybrids, places them in their historical context, and introduces the articles that examine the strategies hybrids undertake to scale and grow, the impacts for which they strive, and the reception to them by mainstream firms. It aggregates insights from the articles in this special issue in order to examine what hybrid organizations mean for firms and practicing managers as they continue to grow in number and assume a variety of missions in developing and developed countries.
Beyond the Moral Portrayal of Social Entrepreneurs: An Empirical Approach to Who They Are and What Drives ThemJournal of Business Ethics
2014 This paper questions the taken-for-granted moral portrayal depicted in the extant literature and popular media of the devoted social entrepreneurial hero with a priori good ethical and moral credentials. We confront this somewhat ‘idealistic’ and biased portrayal with insights from unique large-scale data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2009 survey on social entrepreneurship covering Belgium and The Netherlands. Binary and multinomial logistic regressions indicate that the intention and dominance of perceived social value creation over economic value creation is indeed what makes social entrepreneurs unique. In contrast to the extant literature, however, our empirical investigation points at a reluctant attitude of social entrepreneurs toward entrepreneurship in terms of confidence in their skills to start and manage a business, their perception of entrepreneurship as a desirable career choice and their involvement in their activities. While the extant literature points at a strong entrepreneurial orientation as a source of ethical issues (e.g., mission drift, profit orientation), the main contribution of this study lies in the reverse observation: ethical issues are also likely to emanate from a frail entrepreneurial profile. We formulate empirically grounded propositions that may serve as a basis for theory-building and testing purposes.
A quantitative comparison of social and commercial entrepreneurship: Toward a more nuanced understanding of social entrepreneurship organizations in contextJournal of Social Entrepreneurship
2012 This study empirically addresses the differences between social and commercial entrepreneurship by using the largest available quantitative data source, namely the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) 2009 survey on social entrepreneurship in Belgium and The Netherlands. We use a combination of exploratory statistical analyses and qualitative techniques to generate propositions on the organizations and initiatives that social entrepreneurs are involved in and contrast them with our understanding of commercial entrepreneurs. This study contributes to answer the call for more quantitative research and simultaneously argues that, despite the potential contribution of large-scale data, the validity and reliability of measurement instruments cannot be seen independently from their particular context.
A Dialogue with William J. Baumol: Insights on Entrepreneurship Theory and EducationEntrepreneurship Theory and Practice
2012 This interview and commentary addresses key issues in entrepreneurship by highlighting William Baumol's contributions and his personal insights. We emphasize the multilevel approach that entrepreneurship research should adopt, and that assumptions underlying the research are too often unstated, rendering comparison between studies difficult. Baumol argues for more experimentation and government support of research on ways to improve the teaching of innovative entrepreneurship, since there is little evidence on what works and what does not. The discussion stresses that entrepreneurship is a multifaceted phenomenon that varies depending on context, the level of innovation, and its impact on society. Consequently, entrepreneurship research requires the development of an encompassing paradigm, appropriate educational methods, and study of the institutions that provide the most desirable incentives.
Creating Social Change Out of Nothing: The Role of Entrepreneurial Bricolage in Social Entrepreneurs' Catalytic InnovationsSocial and Sustainable Entrepreneurship
2011 Social entrepreneurship is primarily concerned with the development of innovative solutions to society's most challenging problems. Since social entrepreneurship flourishes in resource-constrained environments, social innovation may depend on the extent to which social entrepreneurs can combine and apply the resources at hand in creative and useful ways to solve problems – “bricolage.” Moreover, innovating for social impact relies on a set of institutional and structural supports – “innovation ecology,' which can facilitate or impede innovation. Our research empirically examines these variables as drivers of systemic social change through scaling and replication – “catalytic innovation” (i.e., the development of products and services targeted to unserved markets). Results of a survey conducted with 113 social entrepreneurs indicate that, while innovation ecology is associated with the degree of catalytic innovation, it is mediated by the role and degree of bricolage that social entrepreneurs bring to solving problems. These findings reinforce the role of entrepreneurs as the indispensable agents of social change.
The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteriaEntrepreneurship & Regional Development
2011 Social entrepreneurship has recently received greater recognition from the public sector, as well as from scholars. However, the lack of a unifying paradigm in the field has lead to a proliferation of definitions. Moreover, several approaches of the phenomenon, as well as different schools of thought, have emerged in different regions of the world. At first glance, because of different conceptions of capitalism and of the government's role, there seems to be a difference between the American and the European conceptions of social entrepreneurship. The objective of this paper is to clarify the concepts of ‘social entrepreneurship’, ‘social entrepreneur’ and ‘social entrepreneurship organization’ and to examine whether there is a transatlantic divide in the way these are conceived and defined.