2018 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON)
Social Entrepreneurship as the Novel Approach to Modern
Innovative Entrepreneurs
Suisin Lam-Lam, Eduardo Ahumada-Tello, Ismael Plascencia-López and Juan M. Perusquia-Velasco
Facultad de Contaduría y Administración, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Tijuana, México
slam@uabc.edu.mx; eahumada@uabc.edu.mx; ismael@uabc.edu.mx; perusquia@uabc.edu.mx
Abstract— The present article describes a general
overview of basic concepts that coincide with the point of
view of several researchers on the subject of social
entrepreneurship, the characteristics, personality traits
and the entrepreneurial process within a social context,
the possible challenges and how to overcome them; so that
capabilities and competences to become a social
entrepreneurs or a social innovator can be developed
through education and by implementing specific
pedagogical strategies.
Keywords— social entrepreneurship, social innovators,
characteristics, personality traits, entrepreneurial process,
pedagogical strategies, challenges.
I. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the appearance of a phenomenon called
social entrepreneurship has produced a constant flow of
business activities [1]. The term Social Entrepreneurship is
a combined concept with business and social values. [2].
Social Entrepreneurship comprises a series of steps through
which social entrepreneurs through innovation and the
combination of resources originate a social value [3]. In this
context, to motivate the development and strengthen of
social entrepreneurship, we have worked hard to channel it
into the educational field where the pedagogical tools that
increase the interest and development of future social
entrepreneurs are used. To this day, however, social
entrepreneurial education requires an explicit theorization
[4].
As such, business schools have in their hands a great
opportunity, almost unique to collaborate in developing
social entrepreneurs. Individuals capable of providing
services or creating products to solve important problems of
society, that other companies or the government cannot
solve or cover. Some of these problems require solutions
provided by science or technology, but many others can be
solved using simple innovation and creativity to use the
resources it has [5]. That is why social entrepreneurship
provides the skills and knowledge of a company, which are
required for the wide variety of projects and problems,
which are not solved by conventional market models [6].
978-1-5386-2047-2/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE
After the literature review on the subject, this article
addressee the basics of social entrepreneurship for the reader
to know and understand such subject, its importance in
society and the need to develop it thought education.
II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
A. Social Entrepreneurship concept
Social entrepreneurship is a "simple term with a complex
range of meanings" [7]. Therefore, if there were a clear and
unified understanding of the subject, one of the main
barriers to advance in the academic research of the subject
would be eliminated. Example of this, you can find multiple
definitions of academics from different disciplines,
including accounting, entrepreneurship, economics and
politics [8].
In this context, a vast collection of definitions can be found
on the topic that range from those that tend to the more
humanistic explanation of the subject to those that explain it
as a business model plain and simple; each focusing on
different aspects like generating income, impacting socially,
generating new jobs, creating changes in the economic,
social and governance of social entrepreneurship [2].
Although there is no unified definition on the subject, there
are three selection criteria that stand out in the existing
literature: search for a social mission, innovation as the main
objective, and the income to be received for the work done.
In this first selection criterion, the researchers agree that
social enterprises require an explicit and implicit social goal
[9]–[12]. In other words, the term "social" means that social
entrepreneurs develop products and / or services that
directly satisfy basic human needs that other institutions can
not satisfy [13]. The main difference with "regular"
entrepreneurs is that they see the creation of economic value
as their main objective; whereas the highest priority of
"social" entrepreneurs is to create social value [3]. The
following two criteria are more related to the understanding
of the topic of "entrepreneurship".
For the second criterion of selection, the literature mentions
that the objective of social entrepreneurs needs an
innovation in goods and services [3], [11], [14], [15].
Therefore, individuals and organizations that do not
participate in proposing innovative solutions for complex
 2018 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON)
social problems are beyond the reach of social
entrepreneurship.
Finally, for several researchers, the term "entrepreneurship"
is a synonym between exposure to a market logic and social
entrepreneur [12], [16]. This last one of the criteria,
apparently, is one of the few accepted. Although some
academics and legislators give more weight to obtaining
income through work for a person to be considered a social
entrepreneur [17]–[19]; others define social
entrepreneurship as companies with an economic sustenance
and that, in turn, create social value, regardless of where the
income comes from [20].
B. Characteristics of social entrepreneurship.
Next, I describe the five dimensions found in the literature,
which are the commitments that a social entrepreneur must
meet to meet the most basic needs that every human being
has and therefore, improve their quality of life [17].
9 Social vision: The commitment towards social
problems usually falls on be responsible with the
environment and society [21]. For this reason, social
entrepreneurs often act as advocates for social needs
that are not covered by governments and private
companies [22].
9 Sustainability: Sustainable development through the
practices of natural capitalism to create better
livelihoods for individuals. Within this search, there
needs to be a coherence between sustainability and the
strategic management of resources, values and care for
the environment [23].
9 Social networks: There are three dimensions that the
theory of social capital suggests: structural, relational
and cognitive [24]. It is essential that social
entrepreneurs create formal and informal social
networks so that they can be enriched in terms of new
ideas, skills, advice, fundraising and share the same
motivation that characterizes all social entrepreneurs
[24], [25].
From a structural perspective, network links allow an
abundant exchange of knowledge that generate the best,
most important and innovative answers that benefit the
community in general [19], [24], [26]. The ties of
personal social networks unite the entrepreneur and
potential investors [27].
Considering from the relational point of view, adequate
participation in networks leads to collaborative learning
and helps to improve understanding of the use of
standards. The credibility of social efforts is improved
by identifying the fit between opportunities and social
need [28].
9 Innovation: To improve innovation skills it is necessary
for individuals to develop a mixture of intellectual and
social knowledge [24]. Hence, it is clear that to create a
social and strategic adjustment for products and / or
services by taking advantage of unexplored or
underdeveloped markets, social entrepreneurs must
make use of innovative processes and technologies.
[29].
9 Financial returns: Social entrepreneurship is manifested
in commercial models that range from non-profit
companies, hybrid companies to social enterprises [30].
Non-profit organizations are based, mainly, on the
availability of private funds to meet what are the main
needs of society based on a social vision.
Hybrid companies partially recover their costs through
the benefits generated by goods and services [29]. The
latter can also depend on grants from governments and
corporations. On the contrary, social enterprises are
established as profit companies, they emphasize social
returns and financial returns. Profits are reinvested in
the business to serve social policy initiatives [31], for
example, Grameen Bank's microfinance.
C. Personality traits
Another important issue to know within the field of Social
Entrepreneurship are the personality traits, which are
characteristics that distinguish everyone from the others.
They are usually permanent and predict the behavior of the
person in certain similar situations. Coupled with this,
current theorists agree that there are five dimensions of
personality, commonly referred to as the "big five" or "the
five-factor model" (see Costa and McCrae (1992). general
way, each one of them:
1. Extroversion (E): Those people who are characterized
by being very sociable and optimistic.
2. Neuroticism (N): People who generally have mood
swings, instability in emotions, anxiety and become
depressed easily.
3. Affability (A): People who are empathetic with others,
kind and noble.
4. Awareness (C): Characterized because of being straight
people, comply with rules or norms, for that reason,
they can be trusted and are very hardworking.
5. Openness to experience (O): They are people who love
to be liberal. Seek to solve problems in an innovative
way [32].
III. ENTREPRENEURIAL PROCESSES IN A SOCIAL
ENTREPRENEURSHIP CONTEXT
The model of inputs-throughputs-outputs has been adapted
to study if there are inequalities between the background
and results that may affect the way that the entrepreneurial
processes work in the social context. This approach is
focused on those who have appeared in more current studies
of social entrepreneurship. (e.g., [3], [8]) [33].
A. Background.
According to current research on the topic of Social
Entrepreneurship, there are four classifications only
developed in a context of Social Entrepreneurship:
ƒ Social motivation/mission.
Three facets are particularly outstanding. The description of
the facets that follow serves as the basis for suggesting the
 2018 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON)
power of the social mission in the development of a
business. In the first place, Social Entrepreneurship is born
of from aspirations centered on others or centered on
collectives, such as the distribution of wealth or community
development.
Secondly, most of the social missions are concerned with
solving social and long-standing needs, among which stand
out: people living in poverty, with hunger, dirty water
problems, lack of employment, transportation, education,
human rights, among others [17]. Because these needs are
commonly presented in society, they are easily identified,
without the need to invest so many resources to detect them.
In the third place, a mission that has a social dimension, in
general, its behavior is stronger than a commercial mission
[34]. They have a solid mission.
ƒ Opportunity Identification
The components that identify whether it is possible to
recognize opportunities outside of a context of Social
Entrepreneurship depends on the interplay between the
search of society so that its problems are solved and the
desire of social entrepreneurs to address them.
In the field of Social Entrepreneurship, an important
indicator that tells us when there is an opportunity is
because it draws attention to having both financial and
community support [3].
ƒ Access to capital / funding
In general, financing and the entrance to capital for social
entrepreneurs is growing. On the one hand, social
entrepreneurs who are not for profit, are having more
sources of funding through government support and
donations; and on the other hand, financing and investments
on a large scale are less available, which are very required
for the increase and research and development (R & D) [17].
ƒ Multiple stakeholders
A stakeholder is any interested person or group that can be
influenced, or it influences the capacity of a company that
seeks to achieve its proposed goals [35].
Also, the idea of ownership differs significantly from a non-
profit to a private company. This is reflected in [28] the
detail of forms of social ownership formed by local or
community clients, trustees or groups. These groups are part
of the property of the organization to be granted power and
legitimacy. In this way they have greater opportunities to
ask for a solution to their problems.
B. Outcomes
According to the latest research on the subject, there are
three classifications of results that are only from a context of
Social Entrepreneurship:
x Social value creation.
Although the differences in the types of creation of value can
be considerable, three characteristics of Social Value
Creation are identified that can be useful to identify the
effects of Social Value Creation in the business processes.
In the first place, it can be inferred that the value created by
a social enterprise is a positive externality, because it does
not benefit the person involved with the exchange of the
good or service.
Second, it is its rarity in the generated result. If a
comparison is made with the number of companies pursuing
an economic value, those seeking the SVC is less. To
conclude, the measurement of the SVC is very difficult to
elaborate.
x Satisfying multiple stakeholders.
The stakeholders of the social enterprises may be looking
for the ultimate objective of increasing the impact, whether
social and / or environmental, in such a way that they could
look for more profitable reports, double or triple. Although,
this could cause problems among stakeholders to compete
for more financial benefits [33].
x Sustainability of solutions
A social entrepreneur must take care that when he solves a
social problem, he must not originate another. For this
reason, sustainable resources and social impact are essential
for this type of enterprise [33].
C. Entrepreneurial orientation
Next, the five dimensions of business orientation that are
presented in an immensity of types of companies are
addressed:
x Innovativeness: It is the will to participate, creating and
experimenting when introducing new goods and / or
services, and also being a technology leader with R & D
in the creation of new processes.
x Proactiveness: It consists of looking for opportunities
and incorporating new products and / or services
anticipating the competitors and preventing the request
of possible orders.
x Risk-taking: It consists of not being afraid of the
unknown and venturing. taking large amounts of loans
and / or commit valuable resources in environments that
are not known.
x Competitive aggressiveness: Intensity of the efforts of a
company to overcome its rivals and characterized by a
strong offensive posture or aggressive responses to the
actions of competitors.
x Autonomy: Ability to perform in their work and decide
independently and select measures to generate a
business concept and carry it out until this completion
[36].
IV. DEVELOPING SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURS AND SOCIAL
INNOVATORS THROUGH EDUCATION
Based on the Theory of Social Identity and research on self-
efficacy, the following is an approach to the personality of
social type and for the self-efficacy of social
entrepreneurship education, which aims to support students
in increasing their identities in the field of social
entrepreneurship and to create confidence that they can
achieve social change.
Students, having an identity focus for the education of this
type of entrepreneurship, converts this community into a
social category, which motivates students to become active
members. These students can feel identified with social and
innovative entrepreneurs, and, as a result, increase wishes
 2018 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON)

congruent with that identity. Educators can help students to (3) Social persuasion (that is, influence that guides
develop an entrepreneurial identity through: certain human behaviors) [39].
Knowing what is the definition of social category;
exemplifying the characteristics of prototype members; and V. PEGAGOGICAL STRATEGIES
providing opportunities for active participation to be It is proposed that teachers guide students who wish to be
achieved as part of the social entrepreneurship community social entrepreneurs to develop their identity through the
[37]. three tools mentioned above: defining the social category,
identifying prototypical members and their characteristics,
A. Defining the Social Category
and an active commitment; and at the same time, develop
It is fundamental to have a clear perception of social their self-efficacy through the other three tools mentioned:
entrepreneurship as a series of steps to create value, making domain experiences, modeling, and social persuasion.
use of the combination of resources, which are dedicated, to
analyze and to obtain the best advantage of the opportunities Table 1 displays the instrument that each pedagogical
that arise through the stimulation of social change or the technique has to intervene in the social identity and the self-
satisfaction of social needs. Social entrepreneurship can be efficacy of the students [37].
seen as a process when offering products and / or services,
as well as creating new companies [3]. Table 1. Instrument for Developing Social Identity and Self-
B. Prototypical Members and Characteristics Efficacy by Pedagogical Technique
Pedagogical Identify as Social Self-Efficacy
It is essential that students get involved by participating in
Techniques Entrepreneur
role models of the social entrepreneurship category and
Readings Defining the social Modeling.
highlight their characteristics.
and Lectures category. (Readings/Lectures)
These models can captivate students to Social
Entrepreneurship, encouraging them to imagine what it is Identifying
prototypical Using social
like to be a member of this category.
members and persuasion: (Lectures)
Dees (1998) gives a description of what it means to be a
characteristics.
social entrepreneur according to five properties linked to
behavior, which are used as agents of change in the social Cases Identifying Modeling.
sector through (1) embrace a mission to invent or maintain prototypical
social value; (2) contemplate and investigate that there are members and Simulating mastery
opportunities consistent with the mission; (3) be part of the characteristics. experiences.
improvements and continuous training; (4) conduct Biography Identifying Modeling.
themselves with determination before the possible limitation Assignment prototypical
of the resources; and (5) present yourself as a responsible members and
person before those who receive the service and the results characteristics.
achieved. Group Encouraging active Providing mastery
Projects engagement experiences.
Active Engagement
One way to help students identify with Social
Entrepreneurship and innovation is to take them into
VI. OVERCOMING CHALLENGES
account so that they are an active part of projects that create
social value. While it is true, education in Social Entrepreneurship has all
For this reason, teachers can use some techniques that help the elements to be of great interest and influence the
students take the initiative and perform activities that students, it also has several challenges, which can represent
reinforce this type of entrepreneurship. For example, you undesirable obstacles.
can use service learning or other types of group work that The recommendations for each of the different challenges
are guided to develop within a context of Social that teachers can confront are discussed and analyzed below.
Entrepreneurship [37].
1. Institutional support. It may be useful to manage
C. Self-Efficacy financial aid in other units outside the business school;
The following three processes are considered particularly external sources of funding can greatly help to not rely
relevant for the education of social entrepreneurship by solely on the help of the institution, because the
which the self-efficacy of an individual is affected: resources become increasingly legitimate and therefore,
(1) Domain experiences (that is, people being the help of other agencies is necessary to increase the
successful because of their previous practices); participation of students in forming a social enterprise.
(2) Modeling (that is, when people learn, seeing 2. Failure of the student's project. Not all projects will be
others); and successful. There are many causes for which companies
fail, among them may be: unplanned events, insufficient
 2018 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON)
planning and operation and expectations outside of
reality.
When instructors teach them diversity of tools that
increase self-efficacy, they must also teach to have
realistic expectations and not to have excess
confidence. As well as, communicate the challenges,
risks and / or possible errors related to each project.
3. Access to capital. It is the search for having enough
resources to create a project or initiatives, in this case, a
social enterprise. There are many higher education
centers that have resources, but in a limited way. These
resources are destined for the research centers where
the initiatives arise.
In this way, teachers can encourage students to have
their projects related to research centers so that they can
obtain the following benefits: funds to generate their
project, share and enrich their knowledge, recognition,
and therefore, it can be a successful project with a great
impact on society.
4. Public relations. Known as PR. With increased use of
the Internet and social networks, most students have a
blog or website. The Facebook and Twitter networks
are the most used and are a good strategy to get known
and collaborate with the local media.
5. Security/safety. Maintaining the safety of all the people
involved in the project is an extremely important
activity, arguably the main one. Therefore, the teacher
must make known the security measures to future social
entrepreneurs [38].
CONCLUSIONS
Currently, the issue of Social Entrepreneurship has gained
great interest in society. Researchers have come to consider
that social entrepreneurship is promising to help remedy
many of society's problems that cannot be covered by
bureaucratic governments or philanthropic organizations
oriented to charity. One of the primordial characteristics of
most social entrepreneurs is the creation of social value that
includes innovation and the combination of resources. The
pedagogical tools are intended to participate in the training
of entrepreneurs and social innovators to provide services,
technology, and products to solve social problems.
The social entrepreneurship has a complex degree of
meanings. One of the main barriers to advance in academic
research is the non-unification of the concept. There are
three criteria described in the literature, which are: the main
objective is to help society; the interest to be innovative; and
the approach that is given to the income that seeks to make
organizations economically sustainable. The main
characteristics of the social entrepreneurship that distinguish
it from the "regular" entrepreneurship are: social vision,
sustainability, social networks, innovation, and financial
returns.
The entrepreneurial process is a model of inputs-
throughputs-outputs has been adapted to analyze if the
changes in the background and results of social
entrepreneurship manage to intervene or modify the manner
in which entrepreneur’s work processes in a social context.
The Social Entrepreneurship is oriented towards the search
of being innovative, proactive, knowing how to take risks,
be competitive and have autonomy.
For students to create identities and gaining confidence is
necessary to achieve a positive change in society as social
entrepreneurs requires that focuses in: an identity theory; a
social category that helps to create a social value by
promoting social challenges or satisfying the needs of
society; to expose to prototypical members; to provide
opportunities for participation in projects of the same type;
and self-efficacy. The most recommended pedagogical
strategies or techniques for this mentioned development are
lectures, cases, biography assignment, and group projects.
It is fundamental that the instructors of social
entrepreneurship prepare their students on how to face some
challenges, which are described below: if you do not have
your own resources, you can buy them from external
sources of funding; to prevent the business from failing,
expectations must be adequately established and caution
against overconfidence; support social entrepreneurs to
generate funds through successful and impact projects;
increase public relations to make themselves known and
generate social networks; and finally, every project must
take care of safety and security.
REFERENCES
[1] D. D. Brock and S. D. Steiner, “Social
Entrepreneurship Education: Is It Achieving the
Desired Aims?,” Europe, vol. 4430, no. 308, pp.
1133–1152, 2009.
[2] J. Perusquia, Kelly, and E. Ahumada-Tello,
“Mexican Social Entrepreneurs in the Baja Region:
Innovation, leadership and motivation.,” West.
Acad. Manag. Journal., pp. 1–12, 2018.
[3] J. Mair and I. Martí, “Social entrepreneurship
research: A source of explanation, prediction, and
delight,” J. World Bus., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 36–44,
2006.
[4] D. D. Brock and M. Kim, “Social Entrepreneurship
Education Resource Handbook,” SSRN Electron. J.,
Apr. 2011.
[5] J. Caulier-grice, G. Mulgan, and R. Murray, “The
open book of social innovations. Social innovator
series: ways to design, develop and grow social
innovations,” Young Found., vol. 30, no. 8, p. 224,
2010.
[6] B. Drayton, “Everyone a Changemaker,”
Innovation, no. Winter, pp. 8–11, 2006.
[7] J. Trexler, “Social entrepreneurship as an algorithm:
Is social enterprise sustainable?,” in E:CO
Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 2008.
[8] J. C. Short, T. W. Moss, and G. T. Lumpkin,
“Research in Social Entrepreneurship: Past
 2018 IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON)
Contributions and Future Opportunities,” Strateg.
Entrep. J., 2009.
[9] S. T. Certo and T. Miller, “Social entrepreneurship:
Key issues and concepts,” Bus. Horiz., vol. 51, no.
4, pp. 267–271, 2008.
[10] J. Mair and O. Schoen, “Successful social
entrepreneurial business models in the context of
developing economies,” Int. J. Emerg. Mark., vol. 2,
no. 1, pp. 54–68, 2007.
[11] A. M. Peredo and J. Chrisman, “Toward a Theory
of,” Acad. Manag. Rev., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 309–328,
2006.
[12] A. M. Peredo and M. McLean, “Social
entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept,”
J. World Bus., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 56–65, 2006.
[13] C. Seelos and J. Mair, “Social entrepreneurship:
Creating new business models to serve the poor,”
Bus. Horiz., vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 241–246, 2005.
[14] S. H. Alvord, L. D. Brown, and C. W. Letts, “Social
Entrepreneurship and Societal Transformation,” J.
Appl. Behav. Sci., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 260–282, 2004.
[15] E. Chell, K. Nicolopoulou, and M. Karataş-Özkan,
“Social entrepreneurship and enterprise:
International and innovation perspectives,” Entrep.
Reg. Dev., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 485–493, 2010.
[16] B. L. Massetti, “the Social Entrepreneurship Matrix
As a Tipping Point for Change.Pdf,” vol. 10, no. 3,
pp. 1–8, 2008.
[17] J. Austin, H. Stevenson, and J. Wei-Skillern, “Social
and Commercial Entrepreneurship: Same, Different,
or Both?,” pp. 1–22, 2006.
[18] S. Dorado, “Social Entrepreneurial Ventures:
Different Values so Different Process of Creation,
No?,” J. Dev. Entrep., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 319–343,
2006.
[19] J. Thompson and B. Doherty, “The diverse world of
social enterprise,” Int. J. Soc. Econ., vol. 33, no. 5/6,
pp. 361–375, 2006.
[20] J. Mair, J. Robinson, and K. Hockerts, Social
Entrepreneurship. 2006.
[21] P. D. Keogh and M. J. Polonsky, “Environmental
commitment: a basis for environmental
entrepreneurship?,” J. Organ. Chang. Manag., vol.
11, no. 1, pp. 38–49, 1998.
[22] M. London, “Leadership and Advocacy:. Dual Roles
for Corporate Social Responsibility and Social
Entrepreneurship,” Organ. Dyn., vol. 37, no. 4, pp.
313–326, 2008.
[23] J. L. Thompson, “A strategic perspective of
entrepreneurship,” Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res., vol.
5, no. 6, pp. 279–296, 1999.
[24] J. Nahapiet and S. Ghoshal, “Social Capital,
Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational
Advantage,” Acad. Manag. Rev., vol. 23, no. 2, pp.
242–266, 1998.
[25] A. Greve and J. W. Salaff, “E T & P,” pp. 1–22,
2003.
[26] M. Chen and M. Wang, “Social networks and a new
venture ’ s innovative capability : the role of trust
within entrepreneurial teams,” R D Manag., vol. 38,
no. 3, pp. 253–264, 2008.
[27] S. Shane and D. Cable, “Network Ties, Reputation,
and the Financing of New Ventures,” Manage. Sci.,
vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 364–381, 2002.
[28] E. Shaw and S. Carter, “Social entrepreneurship,” J.
Small Bus. Enterp. Dev., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 418–
434, 2007.
[29] C. K. Prahalad, The Fortune at the Bottom of the
Pyramid, no. 26. 2006.
[30] J. Elkington and P. Hartigan, The power of
unreasonable people : how social entrepreneurs
create markets that change the world. Harvard
Business School Press, 2008.
[31] R. Gunn, C. Durkin, G. Singh, and J. Brown,
“Social entrepreneurship in the social policy
curriculum,” Soc. Enterp. J., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 74–
80, 2008.
[32] D. J. Llewellyn and K. M. Wilson, “The
controversial role of personality traits in
entrepreneurial psychology,” Educ. + Train., vol.
45, no. 6, pp. 341–345, 2003.
[33] G. T. Lumpkin, T. W. Moss, D. M. Gras, S. Kato,
and A. S. Amezcua, “Entrepreneurial processes in
social contexts: how are they different, if at all?,”
Sex. Abuse, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 761–783, Apr. 2013.
[34] A. Campbell and S. Yeung, “Creating a Sense of
Mission Campbell Yeung 1991.pdf,” Long Range
Plann., vol. 24, no. April, pp. 10–20, 1991.
[35] T. M. Jones, “Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: a
Synthesis of Ethics and Economics.,” Acad. Manag.
Rev., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 404–437, 1995.
[36] G. T. Lumpkin and G. . Dess, “Clarifying the
entrepreneurial orientation construcy and linking it
to performance,” Acad. Manag. Rev., vol. 21, no. 1,
pp. 135–172, 1996.
[37] I. H. Smith and W. P. Woodworth, “Developing
Social Entrepreneurs and Social Innovators: A
Social Identity an...: EBSCOhost,” Acad. Manag.
Learn. Educ., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 390–407, 2012.
[38] J. G. Dees, “The meaning of ‘Social
Entrepreneurship,’” Stanford Univ. Sch. Bus., pp. 1–
5, 1998.
[39] R. Wood and A. Bandura, “Social Cognitive Theory
of Organizational Management,” Academy of
Management Review, vol. 14, no. 3. pp. 361–384,
1989.