ارائه مدل پارادایمی مفهوم‌سازی کسب‌وکارهای فراگیر اجتماعی با رویکرد فراترکیب

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه مدیریت دانشکده علوم انسانی دانشگاه حضرت معصومه (س)

چکیده

کسب‌وکار فراگیر اجتماعی که نسخه به‌روز شده کارآفرینی اجتماعی و کسب‌وکارهای اجتماعی است به دنبال ایجاد شبکه تأمین ارزش در بنگاه می‌باشد که برای رسیدن به این هدف از رویکرد درگیر نمودن افراد پایه هرم درآمد، آسیب دیدگان اجتماعی، معلولان و اقشار محروم جامعه نه‌تنها به‌عنوان مصرف‌کننده بلکه به‌عنوان تولیدکننده، توزیع‌کننده، بازاریاب و تأمین‌کننده استفاده می‌نماید. استراتژی پژوهش حاضر کیفی و ازنظر هدف بنیادی و از نگاه ماهیت و روش توصیفی – تحلیلی است. در این پژوهش از روش فراترکیب برای جمع‌آوری اطلاعات و از تحلیل داده بنیاد گلیزری برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده ها استفاده‌شده است و مقالات مرتبط با موضوع پژوهش بین سال‌های 2010 تا 2019 موردبررسی قرارگرفته است. ماحاصل تجزیه‌وتحلیل یافته، شناسایی و برچسب‌گذاری 48 مفهوم در قالب 13 مقوله فرعی و 6 مقوله اصلی است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد با «ظرفیت‌سازی چندگانه» از طریق «رشد فراگیر» و «نوآوری پایدار» و  بازتولید « خلق ارزش اجتماعی » با درگیر نمودن « شبکه ارزش مشترک » و «ارزش‌آفرینی پویا» مفهوم‌سازی و خلق «کسب‌وکارهای فراگیر اجتماعی» میسر می‌گردد.

عنوان مقاله [English]

Presenting a Paradigmatic Model of Conceptualizing Social Inclusive Businesses with a Meta-Synthesis Approach

نویسنده [English]

  • mohammadreza fallah
Hazrat-e Masoumeh Masoumeh University
چکیده [English]

 Objective: Social Inclusive Business, an up-to-date version of Social Entrepreneurship and Social Business, seeks to create a shared value networks in firms. This business achieves this through the approach of engaging with the Base of the Pyramid (BOP), the socially disadvantaged, and the disabled in the society, not only as consumers, but also as a manufacturers, distributors, marketers and suppliers. The main purpose of this study is to provide a paradigmatic model for the conceptualization of Social Inclusive Business.  Methodology: The strategy of the present research is qualitative; in terms of purpose, it is fundamental and in terms of nature and method is descriptive-analytical. In this study, Meta-Synthesis approach was used for data collection and Grounded Theory was used for data analysis. Articles related to the research topic between 2010 and 2019 were reviewed. Finding: based on the date analysis, 48 concepts were identified, conceptualized, and classified under 13 subcategories and 6 main categories. The results show that different aspects of the business should be considered with an innovative look and in order to gain social legitimacy.  Conclution: To this end, conceptualization and creation of " Social Inclusive Businesses" should be undertaken with "multiple capacity building" through "inclusive growth" and "sustainable innovation" as well as reproduction of "social value creation" involving "shared value network" and "dynamic value creation". 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Social Inclusive Businesses
  • Multiple Capacity Building
  • Social Value Creation
  • Dynamic Value Creation
  • Shared Value Networks

مراجع

  1. Aakhus, M., & Bzdak, M. (2012). Revisiting the role of “shared value” in the business-society relationship. Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 31(2), 231-246.
  2. Adams, R., Jeanrenaud, S., Bessant, J., Denyer, D., & Overy, P. (2016). Sustainability‐oriented innovation: A systematic review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(2), 180-205.
  3. Arora, B., & Kazmi, B. (2012). Performing Citizenship An Innovative Model of Financial Services for Rural Poor in India. Business & Society, 51(3), 450-4477.
  4. Baldo, M. (2014). Developing Businesses and Fighting Poverty: Critical Reflections on the Theories and Practices of CSR, CSV, and Inclusive Business. In (pp. 191-223).
  5. Bals, L., & Tate, W. L. (2018). Sustainable supply chain design in social businesses: advancing the theory of supply chain. Journal of Business Logistics, 39(1), 57-79.
  6. Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of management Journal, 53(6), 1419-1440.
  7. Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing–Insights from the study of social enterprises. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397-441.
  8. Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of management review, 39(3), 364-381.
  9. Bonnell, V., & Veglio, F. (2011). Inclusive business for sustainable livelihoods. Field Actions Science Report, 5(6).
  10. Boons, F., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. (2013). Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner production, 45, 9-19.
  11. Borrella, I., Carrasco-Gallego, R., Moreno, J., & Mataix, C. (2012). Social issues in sustainable supply chain networks: State of the art and further research directions. 62nd IIE Annual Conference and Expo 2012, 383-390.
  12. Cabrera, D., Cabrera, L., & Powers, E. (2015). A unifying theory of systems thinking with psychosocial applications. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(5), 534-545.
  13. Calton, J. M., Werhane, P. H., Hartman, L. P., & Bevan, D. (2013). Building partnerships to create social and economic value at the base of the global development pyramid. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(4), 721-733.
  14. Carlos Perez de Mendiguren Castresana, J. (2013). Social enterprise in the development agenda. Opening a new road map or just a new vehicle to travel the same route? Social Enterprise Journal, 9(3), 247-268.
  15. Chamberlain, W. O., & Anseeuw, W. (2017). Contract Farming as Part of a Multi-Instrument Inclusive Business Structure: A Theoretical Analysis. Agrekon, 56(2), 158-172.
  16. Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of “creating shared value”. California Management Review, 56(2), 130-153.
  17. de Sousa Teodosio, A. d. S., & Comini, G. (2012). Inclusive business and poverty: prospects in the Brazilian context. Revista de Administração, 47(3), 410-421.
  18. Dentoni, D., Pascucci, S., Poldner, K., & Gartner, W. B. (2018). Learning “who we are” by doing: Processes of co-constructing prosocial identities in community-based enterprises. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 603-622.
  19. Diaz-Pichardo, R., Sanchez-Medina, P. S., & Garcia De la Torre, C. (2017). Explaining inequality within the BoP: urban vs. rural. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 22(03), 1750016.
  20. Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 81-100.
  21. Evans, S., Fernando, L., & Yang, M. (2017). Sustainable value creation—from concept towards implementation. In Sustainable Manufacturing. Springer, Cham, 203-220.
  22. Flammer, C., & Kacperczyk, A. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and the prevention of knowledge spillovers: Evidence from inevitable disclosure doctrines. Available at SSRN.
  23. George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of management Journal, 59(6), 1880-1895.
  24. Glasbergen, P. (2010). Global action networks: Agents for collective action. Global Environmental Change, 20(1), 130-141.
  25. Golja, T., & Pozega, S. (2012). Inclusive Business – What It Is All About? Managing Inclusive Companies. International Review of Management and Marketing, 2(1), 22-42.
  26. Gouillart, F., & Billings, D. (2013). Community-powered problem solving. Harvard business review, 91(4), 70-77, 140.
  27. Goyal, S., Esposito, M., Kapoor, A., Jaiswal, M., & Sergi, B. (2014). Linking up: Inclusive business models for access to energy solutions at base of the pyramid in India. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 12, 413-438.
  28. Goyal, S., Sergi, B. S., & Jaiswal, M. (2015). How to design and implement social business models for base-of-the-pyramid (BoP) markets? The European Journal of Development Research, 27(5),850-867.
  29. Halme, M., Lindeman, S., & Linna, P. (2012). Innovation for inclusive business: Intrapreneurial bricolage in multinational corporations. Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 743-784.
  30. Hilson, G. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility in the extractive industries: Experiences from developing countries. Resources Policy, 37(2), 131-137.
  31. Høvring, C. M. (2017). Corporate social responsibility as shared value creation: toward a communicative approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 22(2), 239-256.
  32. 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.
  33. Kivleniece, I., & Quelin, B. V. (2012). Creating and capturing value in public-private ties: A private actor's perspective. Academy of management review, 37(2), 272-299.
  34. Korhonen, H. (2013). Organizational needs: A co-creation and human systems perspective. jbm-Journal of Business Market Management, 6(4). 214-227.
  35. Kramer, M. R., & Porter, M. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard business review, 89(1/2), 62-77.
  36. Labaki, R. (2013). Special Issue: A New Business Model: The Emotional Dimension of Organizations: de Gruyter.
  37. Lashitew, A. A., Bals, L., & van Tulder, R. (2018). Inclusive business at the base of the pyramid: the role of embeddedness for enabling social innovations. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1-28.
  38. Light, P. C. (2006). Reshaping social entrepreneurship. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 4(3),47-51.
  39. Likoko, E., & Kini, J. (2017). Inclusive business—a business approach to development. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 24, 84-88. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.03.001
  40. Maconachie, R., & Hilson, G. (2013). Editorial introduction: the extractive industries, community development and livelihood change in developing countries. In: Oxford University Press.
  41. Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36-44.
  42. Maltz, E., & Schein, S. (2012). Cultivating shared value initiatives: a three Cs approach. Journal of Corporate Citizenship(47), 55-74.
  43. Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. In: Stanford social innovation review Stanford.
  44. Mauboussin, M. (2011). What shareholder value is really about. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr. org/2011/10/ceos-must-understand-what-crea.
  45. Mehera, A. R. (2017). Shared value literature review: implications for future research from stakeholder and social perspective. J. Mgmt. & Sustainability, 7, 98.
  46. Michelini, L., & Fiorentino, D. (2012). New business models for creating shared value. Social Responsibility Journal, 8, 561-577. doi:10.1108/17471111211272129
  47. Murray, R., Caulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). The open book of social innovation . Tercer Sector, 233.
  48. O'Neil, I., & Ucbasaran, D. (2016). Balancing “what matters to me” with “what matters to them”: Exploring the legitimation process of environmental entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(2), 133-152.
  49. O'Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of management Perspectives, 27(4), 324-338.
  50. OECD, & Union, E. (2016). Inclusive Business Creation: Good Practice Compendium: OECD Publishing.
  51. Ogliastri, E., Prado, A., Jäger, U., Vives, A., & Reficco, E. (2015). Social Business. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) (pp. 168-173). Oxford: Elsevier.
  52. Panapanaan, V., Bruce, T., Virkki‐Hatakka, T., & Linnanen, L. (2014). Analysis of Shared and Sustainable Value Creation of Companies Providing Energy Solutions at the Base of the Pyramid (BoP). Business Strategy and the Environment, 25. doi:10.1002/bse.1866
  53. Pfitzer, M., Bockstette, V., & Stamp, M. (2013). Innovating for shared value. Harvard business review, 91(9), 100-107.
  54. Porter, M. E. (2012). The New Competitive Advantage: Creating Shared Value. Paper presented at the Presentation at the HSM World Business Forum CSV. Retrieved August.
  55. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard business review, 84(12), 78-92.
  56. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). The big idea: Creating shared value, rethinking capitalism. Harvard business review, 89(1/2), 62-77.
  57. Ramus, T., & Vaccaro, A. (2017). Stakeholders matter: How social enterprises address mission drift. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2), 307-322.
  58. Ranjatoelina, J. (2017). What is an inclusive business model? An ‘extended resource-based theory’ definition built on the investigation of three inclusive enterprises in France.
  59. Rivera-Santos, M., Rufin, C., & Kolk, A. (2012). Bridging the institutional divide: Partnerships in subsistence markets. Journal of Business Research, 65(12),1721-1727.
  60. Rylance, A., & Spenceley, A. (2016). Applying inclusive business approaches to nature-based tourism in Namibia and South Africa. Turizam: međunarodni znanstveno-stručni časopis, 64(4), 371-383.
  61. Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2014). Deliberative and/or instrumental? A typology of CSR communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 10.
  62. Slawinski, N., Pinkse, J., Busch, T., & Banerjee, S. B. (2017). The role of short-termism and uncertainty avoidance in organizational inaction on climate change: A multi-level framework. Business & Society, 56(2), 253-282.
  63. Strand, R., & Freeman, R. E. (2015). Scandinavian cooperative advantage: The theory and practice of stakeholder engagement in Scandinavia. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(1), 65-85.
  64. Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 451-478.
  65. Sulkowski, A. J., Edwards, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2018). Shake your stakeholder: Firms leading engagement to cocreate sustainable value. Organization & Environment, 31(3),223-241.
  66. Sunanda, S. (2016). Microfranchising an Inclusive Business Model. 2016, 3(3). doi:10.21013/jmss.v3.n3.p15
  67. Tewes-Gradl, C., & Knobloch, C. (2010). Inclusive business guide: how to develop business and fight poverty: Endeva.
  68. Tideman, S. G., Arts, M. C., & Zandee, D. P. (2013). Sustainable leadership: Towards a workable definition. Journal of Corporate Citizenship(49), 17-33.
  69. Valente, T. W. (2012). Network interventions. Science, 337(6090), 49-53.
  70. Vellema, W. (2015). Explaining hybrid “personalities” in smallholder sugar cane sourcing. British Food Journal, 117(10), 2547-2563. doi:10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0411
  71. Verboven, H. (2011). Communicating CSR and business identity in the chemical industry through mission slogans. Business Communication Quarterly, 74(4), 415-431.
  72. Virah-Sawmy, M. (2015). Growing inclusive business models in the extractive industries: Demonstrating a smart concept to scale up positive social impacts. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(4), 676-679.
  73. Wach, E. (2012). Measuring the ‘Inclusivity’ of Inclusive Business. IDS Practice Papers, 2012.
  74. Werhane, P. H. (2009). Alleviating poverty through profitable partnerships: Globalization, markets, and economic well-being: Routledge.
  75. Williams, R., & Hayes, J. (2013). Literature review: seminal papers on ‘Shared value’. Economic and Private Sector Professional Evidence and Applied Knowledge Services, http://partnerplatform. org.
  76. Yunus, M. (2010). Building social business: The new kind of capitalism that serves humanity's most pressing needs: PublicAffairs.
  77. 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.
  78. Yunus, M., Sibieude, T., & Lesueur, E. (2012). Social Business and big business: innovative, promising solutions to overcome poverty? Field Actions Science Reports. The journal of field actions(Special Issue 4).

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 06 آذر 1398
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 19 دی 1399
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 11 دی 1399

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار