https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSEI.2016.

075636

16 Int. J. Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2016

Use of marketing in social enterprises

Mir Shahid Satar* Shibu John and

Sadaf Siraj
Department of Management,
Jamia Hamdard University,
New Delhi, 110062, India
Email: mirshahid261@gmail.com
Email: shibu.john14@gmail.com
Email: sirajsadaf@gmail.com
*Corresponding author

Abstract: Social entrepreneurship is relatively a new concept within social

sciences. Like the case with any newly emerging field, social entrepreneurship
is confronting the challenges of justifying the use of new constructs and hence
the challenge of generating new knowledge and insights. Till date, the field of
social entrepreneurship has majorly been consented as a multidisciplinary
approach to social problem solving. In this regard, researchers are attempting to
take insights from different disciplines in an effort towards delimiting the scope
and context of social entrepreneurship. However, social entrepreneurship is
projected or seen as sharing much in common with business management and
entrepreneurship. As such, the different approaches of management domain
find high appropriateness for application, explanation and further expansion of
this field. In light of the above and on the basis of a few qualitative case studies
conducted in the western countries till date, the paper attempts to gain critical
insights about the use of marketing concepts in social enterprises.

Keywords: social entrepreneurship; social entrepreneurship; S-ENT; social

enterprise; social marketing; entrepreneurship; strategy.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Satar, M.S., John, S. and
Siraj, S. (2016) ‘Use of marketing in social enterprises’, Int. J. Social
Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.16–24.

Biographical notes: Mir Shahid Satar is a PhD Research Scholar in the

Department of Management at Jamia Hamdard University, New Delhi, India.
His current research interests cover social entrepreneurship and innovation
management in SMEs.

Shibu John is an Associate Professor in the Department of Management at the

Jamia Hamdard University New Delhi India. His current research interests
cover healthcare policy and innovation management in healthcare.

Sadaf Siraj is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Management at the

Jamia Hamdard University, New Delhi, India. Her research interests cover
marketing in non-profit sector and brand management in SMEs.

Copyright © 2016 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

 Use of marketing in social 17
enterprises
1 Introduction
1
Social entrepreneurship (S-ENT) has been recognised as sharing much in common with
conventional entrepreneurship. Much alike as the field of entrepreneurship is getting
benefited from the entrepreneurial marketing, the social entrepreneurial endeavours are
thus deemed to be benefited from the use of innovative marketing strategies as well.
2
The social enterprises (SEs) have mainly emerged as a response to the failure of the
state as well as private sector in fulfilling the needs of the marginalised and poor sections
of the society (Zahra et al., 2008; Leadbetter, 1997). Thus, SEs are rightly emerging as
socially innovative models of development much deviated from the traditional models of
business, production and consumption (Layard, 2005). Alternatively, social enterprise
model is promising the development and delivery of innovative ways of social problem
solving in a scenario where the traditional public, voluntary or community mechanisms
fail to solve social issues.
Moreover, SEs have been identified to be operating mostly in resource constrained
environments. There is a continuous reduction in the traditional resources and
competitions for these common resources tend to become intensified. In order to serve
the community better, the non-profit ventures have to necessarily adopt business
professional operations and certain marketing techniques to gain efficiency in its services
and products (Reis and Clohesy, 1999). The social enterprise started with a pure social
mission in a not-for profit sector is forced to adopt some revenue generating strategies in
order to sustain in the market and survival. Besides, the recent findings have highlighted
the importance of competition which the SEs are facing from the for-profit sector. Thus,
SEs have been projected as competing for resources with the commercial ventures in
future. On the basis of resource constrained environment as well as the challenges posed
by the social exclusion, the SEs like mainstream entrepreneurial ventures have to
necessarily embrace some innovative entrepreneurial approaches to their marketing if
they have to successfully achieve their objectives.
Keeping in consideration the growing significance of marketing in entrepreneurship
theory and practice; the field of S-ENT (as sharing the principle entrepreneurship tenets)
can be benefited by the innovative use of marketing strategies. However, the marketing in
case of SEs has to have some unique distinctions from mainstream entrepreneurial
marketing. The uniqueness of marketing approaches for S-ENT can be grounded on the
basis of duality of goals pursued by the SEs. The existence of double or even triple
bottom line approaches mandates the SEs to simultaneously pursue both the social as
well as the financial returns for their investments. The scenario thus emphasises taking of
tough decisions by the social entrepreneurs concerning which products and services to
offer and which market segments to pursue. The process gains criticality especially when
SEs have to develop their strategic marketing plans (Boschee, 2006).

2 Literature review

Entrepreneurship in general has been found to have much commonality with marketing.
There are definite lines of overlap between the two fields. For, e.g., both the fields share
pertinent areas of ‘opportunity recognition’ and ‘change’ (Shaw, 2004). According to
Omura et al. (1993), both marketing as well as entrepreneurship strive to identify
18 M.S. Satar et
al.
opportunities in dynamic environments. Collinson and Shaw (2001) contended that
marketing and entrepreneurship typically share the characteristics of being “change
focused, opportunistic in nature and innovative in their approach to management”.
Further, the act of transforming the resources (knowledge, money and technology) for
creating value leaden products has been found to be critical for entrepreneurial
marketing. Similarly, the entrepreneurial ventures have been identified as heavily using
the networks of relationships to gain market knowledge and information (O’Donnell
et al., 2001; Shaw, 2002), which also serves as an area of critical emphasis in marketing
management. Consequently, the competency of leveraging networking and building
relationships with buyers, suppliers and others along the supply chain and in the
immediate micro-environment is emerging as a critical competency for the
entrepreneurial marketing managers (Carson et al., 1995; Hill, 2000). Moreover, the
studies revealing the similarities between entrepreneurship and marketing seem to be
growing from the past two decades (Fillis, 2000; Stokes, 2002). Even though the
‘Knowledge about entrepreneurial marketing is just in its infancy’ (Bjerke and Hultman,
2002), still the field of entrepreneurial marketing is rightly evolving as an important
development in marketing theory and practice (Shaw, 2004).
Further, the recent development of literature contested that the position and
management of marketing in small entrepreneurial firms tends to suitably apply over the
SEs (Shaw, 2004; Bjerke and Hultman, 2002; Carson et al., 1995).
The use of marketing in small entrepreneurial firms occurs naturally in an unplanned
and ad-hoc way or the use tends to be without any conscious marketing decision which
resembles with SEs marketing approaches (Madill and Ziegler, 2012; Shaw, 2004; Bjerke
and Hultman, 2002; Carson et al., 1995; Carson and Cromie, 1989). However, while SEs
marketing has been identified as sharing much in common with entrepreneurial
marketing, the existence of specific factors in the context of SEs can influence
the entrepreneurial marketing of SEs for example; the factors of ‘localembeddedness’,
‘not-for-profit orientation’ have been found to influence the entrepreneurial marketing in
SEs (Shaw, 2004).

3 Methodology

This paper attempts to clarify the use of social marketing in social enterprise. Thus, the
main objectives of this paper are:

• to explore the nature of marketing in SEs

• to compare and contrast the use of social marketing from entrepreneurship marketing
in SEs.

The paper builds upon the work of others and is thus based on the published work on use
of marketing in SEs. This study will give a deep understanding of how the social
marketing is practiced within SEs and other small entrepreneurial firms and emphasises
the need to remove the barriers for systematic adoption of such marketing strategies for
achieving social enterprise goals.
 Use of marketing in social 19
enterprises
4 Nature of marketing in SEs

SEs have been identified to operate across an array of organisational forms ranging from
pure not-for-profit to for-profit organisational models (Kerlin, 2006). The literature
proves that the SEs have been dominantly placed in non-profit sector (Lindsay and Hems,
2004; Peredo and McLean, 2006; Austin et al., 2003). However, they have been placed in
for-profit sector as well (Nicholls, 2006). Nevertheless, an increasing number of
researchers are using the concept of SEs as belonging to a third sector or adopting a
hybrid model. The hybrid nature of SEs have substantially been proposed, explained and
accepted across different contexts over the globe. Some of the authors propounding the
hybrid model of SEs include, for example, Dees (1998), Townsend and Hart (2008),
Peredo and McLean (2006), Mair and Marti (1987), Defourny and Nyssens (2006),
Martin and Osberg (2007), Short et al. (2009) and Dart (2004). However, irrespective of
the nature of the organisational form in which the social enterprise operates, there are
some distinguishing features for being called a social enterprise. One of the pertinent
characteristic features includes the enterprise’s primary goals of social value creation.
Besides, the non-distribution constraint mandates the enterprise to principally reinvest the
surpluses in the business or in the community. Thus, while these features are regarded as
distinct, they concurrently pose some distinct challenges in the strategic management of
such organisation types. For example, the simultaneous pursuing of both the financial and
social goals often creates tension while taking the strategic operational decisions of the
enterprise (Tracey and Jarvis, 2007; Boschee, 2006). Maintaining an appropriate balance
between social impact and financial viability is critical aspect of social enterprise
management.
The tendency of SEs in assuming any organisational model arises primarily because
of their multidimensional nature. Further, the variegated nature of the social problems
complicates the matter with respect to demarking the boundaries or scope of social
enterprise operation. Thus, the marketing of SEs while being innovatively entrepreneurial
has to take care of specific dilemmas and factors.

5 Social marketing as an emerging marketing for SEs

The use of social marketing approaches for addressing social issues can be found in early
1990s. The early evidences of such deliberate social marketing approaches could be
found in the reproductive health program campaigns propounded by Indian Institute of
Management in Calcutta, 1963 (Chandy and Balakrishman, 1965). During the initial
epoch, however, the use of social marketing approaches was predominantly as
communication campaigns in public health awareness campaigns without covering the
broader aspects of customer engagement [use of public health marketing in the USA,
Australia, 1980s (Roccelia and Ward, 1984)].
Social marketing has been applied in varied contexts and situations. However, the
traditional views of social marketing have emphasised the change in individual behaviour
as a focus of the social marketing approaches. The intension of such social marketing
campaigns was mainly to achieve specific behavioural goals with respect to certain
audiences. A wealth of studies have evidenced such types of ‘operational social
marketing’ approaches of social marketing in the past. The recent shift in approaches of
20 M.S. Satar et
al.
social marketing have necessitated the conceptualisation of some ‘upstream’ approaches
– that is critical to change the society as a whole in which the target customer live (laws,
attitudes, cultural norms), in order to ease the individual behaviour change (Lefebvre,
2011). This orientation in the conceptualisation will ensure that social marketing
approaches are utilised in more strategic settings in order to guide the strategy
formulation of the organisations. Thus, the emphasis in this context would be less on
specific audience.
Social marketing by definition is “the application of the marketing discipline to social
issues and causes, that provides a framework for developing innovative solutions to
social problems that have long perplexed and frustrated us” [Lefebvre, (2009), p.143].
The concept of social marketing stands for the marketing endeavours directed to
influence the social behaviours which aims for “not to benefit the marketer but to benefit
the target audience and the general society” (Madill and Ziegler, 2012). The marketing
programs designed to change or alter behaviours for the individuals or society’s interests
can be referred to as social marketing programs (Andreasen and Kotler, 2003). Further, in
order to develop a demarcation of social marketing campaigns from the commercial
marketing, Andreasen (2002) proposed the following criteria’s as benchmarks for
recognising the marketing approaches that could legitimately fall under social marketing
label:
• the goal of the marketing program must be ‘voluntary behaviour change’
• marketing projects must consistently use ‘audience research’
• the program proceeds with a careful segmentation of the target audience.
The central element of any influence strategy is creating attractive and motivational
exchanges with target audiences. The marketing strategy tries to utilise all product, price,
promotion, and place or distribution (4Ps) of traditional marketing mix. This criterion is
in place to ensure that the program is not just advertising or communications. The
marketing program shall pay due attention to the competition faced by the desired
behaviour. However, a marketing program does not necessarily have to have all above
criterion in order to be called as social marketing program. Nevertheless, campaigns that
are purely communication campaigns should not be confused with the social marketing
(Andreasen, 2002). Social campaigners too often practice social advertising rather than
social marketing. Thus the frequent failure of many social advertising can be attributed to
the lack or absence of conditions of monopolisation, canalisation, and supplementation in
the social arena (Lazarsfeld and Merton, 1971). The success of a campaign will depend
on the well development of product, place, promotion, etc. Such concepts were redefined
and were shown to have great degree of applicability in social causes (Kotler and
Zaltman, 1971). In a research paper titled, ‘Social marketing: an approach to planned
social change’, Kotler and Gerald (1971) argued that specific social issues are in need of
innovative solutions and approaches in order to attain public attention and support and
such social causes can get benefited from marketing thinking and planning. However,
they meanwhile contented that there is sufficient distinction between social marketing
and business marketing. Social marketing typically requires dealing with some core
beliefs and values while as business marketing often deals with some superficial
preferences and opinions. The powers as well as limits of social marketing can only be
learned through applying more tools and concepts of marketing to it. Further, the process
of social marketing itself appeals for some marketing research for the consequent
 Use of marketing in social 21
enterprises
development of well-conceived ‘product’. This would require social marketing to move
through specialised mass and communication media to reach target audiences. Further, it
is argued that there may be hard or soft marketing styles, depending on which one is
deemed effective in accomplishing social objectives (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971).

6 Present use of social marketing in SEs

Some studies in the west have argued that adoption of social marketing elements have got
tremendous role in marketing of social ideas of SEs and thus can prove to be offering
potential for the S-ENT arena (Madill and Ziegler, 2012). In a recent report of a research
project over determining the key performance factors of SEs operating in Canada, Boyer
et al. (2008) showed that marketing knowledge vis-à-vis marketing of products or
services constitutes an active and proactive element of scaling up in SEs. In a recent case
study analysis, Oprica (2013) showed how the social enterprise under study (Rotary
organization, Romania) became successful in generating the trust in local community vis-
à-vis in achieving its S-ENT objectives through the conscious adoption of social media
and social networking approaches. The author further argues that although in terms of
theory, S-ENT and social networking have nothing in common; the wise use of social
media and social networking approaches can strongly benefit the S-ENT ventures. Boyer
et al. (2008) in their research also found that lack of marketing skills in social
entrepreneurs rendered the enterprise with little knowledge about buyers and
consequently lack of knowledge about marketing was cited as one of the difficult aspects
of initiating their enterprises. Further evidences are continuously emerging showing the
successful adoption of social marketing in promoting the bigger societal issues and social
goals of SEs to the community at large.

6.1 Use of social marketing as a contested concept

The above criteria’s of benchmarking the social marketing programs by Andreasen and
Kotler (2003) has been used and encouraged by Madill and Ziegler (2012) in describing
the utilisation of social marketing in a case study of ‘One Drop’ enterprise, Canada. They
found the particular social enterprise was utilising many of the elements of social
marketing campaigns. However, there was no conscious adoption of some innovative
social marketing campaigns rather the firm had adopted certain social marketing
approaches without actually knowing that they are using the same. As per authors, ‘One
Drop’ firm had no background knowledge of social marketing and thus did not
consciously devise any formal strategy for the social marketing adoption. The case
analysis revealed that even the lay people, without any understanding of the theoretical
background or even without knowing the definitions of the social marketing concept,
may adopt the elements of social marketing. The use of marketing without any marketing
knowledge by the SEs was further found by Boyer et al. (2008) in a project concerning
the determination of the key performance factors of SEs operating in Canada. Thus, lack
of knowledge cannot serve as a strong barrier to adoption of elements of social marketing
and thus the SEs may intuitively adopt social marketing approaches without any formal
academic knowledge (Madill and Ziegler, 2012). This goes in line with Friestad and
Wright (1994), who showed that the lay people without actually knowing the names of
22 M.S. Satar et
al.
academic theories can have their own persuasion theories. Thus, this raises the question
of how important the overall strategic view is within social marketing.

7 Conclusions

It is evident from the above discussion that social marketing is generally directed to bring
some socially desirable behavioural change in the target segment. Thus, unlike
commercial marketing, social marketing has some difficult goals to accomplish like
bringing some long-term behavioural change in the target society. In light of the above,
the results of social marketing strategies may take comparatively longer time to realise.
Thus, it may obscure the social entrepreneurs from realising the potential of social
marketing in driving the major social changes.
While justifying the importance of strategic social marketing, we propose that
although unsystematic and unplanned adoption of social marketing elements could
generate some fractional results, the SEs may fail to envision the strategic aspects of the
holistic customer engagement process. Thus, the act of creating as well as maintaining
the customer relationships turns to be too critical for the success of social marketing
strategies.
SEs seem to be increasingly adopting the tools and techniques of social marketing.
However, the social marketing literature suggests that there are a number of barriers to its
successful adoption. Consequently, many practitioners and managers remain unaware
about the potential of social marketing in organising or augmenting the social
transformation movements. In this regard creating understanding about the overall
strategic view of social marketing could go in long way in removing the barriers to its
systematic adoption.

Acknowledgements

This paper is a part of the thesis work undertaken by the corresponding author for the
partial fulfilment of requirements of degree of doctor of philosophy.

References
Andreasen, A.R. (2002) ‘Marketing social marketing in the social change marketplace’, Journal of
Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.3–13.
Andreasen, A.R. and Kotler, P. (2003) Strategic Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations, 6th ed.,
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Austin, J., Stevenson, H. and Wei-Skillern, J. (2003) Social Entrepreneurship and Commercial
Entrepreneurship: Same, Different, or Both?’, Working paper series No. 04-029, Harvard
Business Review.
Bjerke, B. and Hultman, C.E. (2002) Entrepreneurial Marketing: The Growth of Small Firms in the
New Economic Era, Edward Elgar, Aldershot.
Boschee, J. (2006) Strategic Marketing for Social Entrepreneurs [online]
http://www.socialent.org/pdfs/StrategicMarketing.pdf (accessed 24 October 2015).
 Use of marketing in social 23
enterprises
Boyer, D., Creech, H. and Paas, L. (2008) ‘Critical success factors and performance measures for
start-up social and environmental enterprises’, Report for SEED Research Programme,
pp.115–139.
Carson, D. and Cromie, S. (1989) ‘Marketing planning in small enterprises: a model and some
empirical evidence’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.33–49.
Carson, D., Cromie, S., McGowan, P. and Hill, J. (1995) Marketing and Entrepreneurship in
SMEs: An Innovative Approach, Prentice-Hall International, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Chandy, K.T.T. and Balakrishman, R. (1965) ‘Proposals for family planning promotion:
a marketing plan’, Studies in Family Planning, Vol. 1, No. 6, pp.7–12.
Collinson, E. and Shaw, E. (2001) ‘Entrepreneurial marketing: a historical perspective on
development and practice’, Management Decision, Vol. 39, No. 9, pp.761–766.
Dart, R. (2004) ‘The legitimacy of social enterprise’, Nonprofit Management and Leadership,
Vol. 14, No. 4, pp.411–424.
Dees, J. (1998) ‘Enterprising non-profits’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76, No. 1, pp.54–67.
Defourny, J. and Nyssens, M. (2010) ‘Conceptions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship
in Europe and the United States: convergences and divergences’, Journal of Social
Entrepreneurship, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.32–53.
Fillis, I. (2000) ‘Being creative at the marketing/entrepreneurship interface: lessons from the art
industry’, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.125–137.
Friestad, M. and Wright, P. (1994) ‘The persuasion knowledge model: how people cope with
persuasion attempts’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.1–31.
Hill, J. (2000) ‘A multidimensional study of the key determinants of effective SME marketing
activity: Part 2’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 7,
No. 6, pp.211–235.
Kerlin, J. (2006) ‘Social Enterprise in the United States and Europe: understanding and learning
from the differences’, Voluntas, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp.246–262.
Kotler, P. and Zaltman, G. (1971) ‘Social marketing: an approach to planned social change’,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 7, No. 86, pp.3–12.
Layard, R. (2005) Happiness: Lessons from a New Science, Penguin Books, London.
Lazarsfeld, P.F. and Merton, R.K. (1971) ‘Mass communication, popular taste and organized social
action’, in Schramm, W. and Roberts, D.F. (Eds.): The Process and Effects of Mass
Communication, pp.554–578, University of Illinois Press, London.
Leadbetter, C. (1997) The Rise of Social Entrepreneurship, Demos, London.
Lefebvre, C. (2009) ‘Integrating cell phones and mobile technologies into public health practice:
a social marketing perspective’, Health Promotion Practice, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp.490–494.
Lefebvre, C. (2011) ‘An integrative model for social marketing’, Journal of Social Marketing,
Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.54–72.
Lindsay, G. and Hems, L. (2004) ‘Societes cooperatives d’interet collectif: the arrival of social
enterprise within the French social economy’, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary
and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp.265–286.
Madill, J. and Ziegler R. (2012) ‘Marketing social missions – adopting social marketing for social
entrepreneurship? A conceptual analysis and case study’, International Journal of Nonprofit
and Voluntary Sector Marketing, Vol. 17, pp.341–351.
Mair, J. and Marti, J. (1987) ‘Social entrepreneurship research: a source of explanation, prediction
and delight’, Journal of World Business, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp.36–44.
Martin, R.L. and Osberg, S. (2007) ‘Social entrepreneurship: the case for definition’, Stanford
Social Innovation Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.28–39.
Nicholls, A. (2006) ‘Introduction: the nature of social entrepreneurship’, in Nicholls, A. (Ed.):
Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change, pp.1–35, Oxford
University Press.
24 M.S. Satar et
al.
O’Donnell, A., Gilmore, A., Cummins, D. and Carson, D. (2001) ‘The network construct in
entrepreneurship research: a review and critique’, Management Decision, Vol. 39, No. 9,
pp.749–760.
Omura, G.S., Calantone, R.J. and Schmidt, J.B. (1993) ‘Entrepreneurialism as a market-satisfying
mechanism in a free market system’, in Hills, G.E. and Mohan-Neill, S.T. (Eds.): Research at
the Marketing/Entrepreneurship Interface, pp.161–171, University of Illinois at Chicago,
Chicago, IL.
Oprica, R. (2013) ‘Social networking for social entrepreneurship’, Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, Vol. 92, pp.664–667.
Peredo, A. and Mclean, M. (2006) ‘Social entrepreneurship: a critical review of the concept’,
Journal of World Business, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.56–65.
Reis, T.K. and Clohesy, S.J. (1999) Unleashing New Resources and Entrepreneurship for the
Common Good: A Scan, Synthesis and Scenario for Action, W.K Kellogg Foundation, Battle
Creek, M.I.
Roccelia, E.J. and Ward, G.W. (1984) ‘The National High Blood Pressure Education Program: a
description of its utility as a generic program model’, Health Education & Behavior, Vol. 11,
No. 3, pp.225–242.
Shaw, E. (2002) ‘Networking’, in Warner, M. (Ed.): International Encyclopedia of Business and
Management, 2nd ed., pp.4667–4673, Thomson Learning, Boston, MA.
Shaw, E. (2004) ‘Marketing in the social enterprise context: is it entrepreneurial?’, Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp.194–205.
Short, J.C., Todd, W.M. and Lumpkin, G.T. (2009) ‘Research in social entrepreneurship: past
contributions and future opportunities’, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2,
p.161.
Stokes, D. (2002) ‘Entrepreneurial marketing in the public sector: the lessons of head teachers as
entrepreneurs’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 18, Nos. 3–4, pp.397–414.
Townsend, D. and Hart, T. (2008) ‘Perceived institutional ambiguity and the choice of
organizational form in social entrepreneurial ventures’, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice,
Vol. 32, No. 4, pp.685–700.
Tracey, P. and Jarvis, O. (2007) ‘Toward a theory of social venture franchising’, Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp.667–685.
Zahra, S., Rawhouser, H., Bhawe, N., Neubaum, D. and Hayton, J. (2008) ‘Globalization of
social entrepreneurship opportunities’, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2,
pp.117–131.

Notes
1 S-ENT is used as abbreviations of social entrepreneurship throughout this document for
reasons of space.
2 SEs is used as abbreviations of social enterprises throughout this document for reasons of
space.