Current theorizations of bricolage in entrepreneurship studies require refinement and development to be used as a theoretical framework for social entrepreneurship. Our analysis traces bricolage's conceptual underpinnings from various disciplines, identifying its key constructs as making do, a refusal to be constrained by limitations, and improvisation. Although these characteristics appear to epitomize the process of creating social enterprises, our research identifies three further constructs associated with social entrepreneurship: social value creation, stakeholder participation, and persuasion. Using data from a qualitative study of eight U.K. social enterprises, we apply the bricolage concept to social entrepreneurial action and propose an extended theoretical framework of social bricolage.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AldrichH. & ZimmerC. (1986). Entrepreneurship through social networks. In SextonD. & SmilorR. (Eds.), The art and science of entrepreneurship (pp. 3–23). New York: Ballinger.
2.
AustinJ., StevensonH., & Wei–SkillernJ. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both?Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30, 1–22.
3.
BakerT., MinerA.S., & EesleyD.T. (2003). Improvising firms: Bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process. Research Policy, 32, 255–276.
4.
BakerT. & NelsonR. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 329–366.
5.
BhidéA.V. (1992). Bootstrap finance: The art of start–ups. Harvard Business Review, 70, 109–117.
6.
BirleyS. (1985). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 1, 107–117.
7.
BorgazaC. & DefournyJ. (2001). The emergence of social enterprise. New York: Routledge.
8.
ChaoE. (1999). The Maoist shaman and the madman: Ritual bricolage, failed ritual, and failed ritual theory. Cultural Anthropology, 14, 505–534.
9.
CiborraC.U. (1996). The platform organization: Recombining strategies, structures and surprises. Organization Science, 7, 103–118.
10.
CiborraC.U. & LanzaraG.F. (1990). Designing dynamic artifacts: Computer systems as formative contexts. In GagliardiP. (Ed.), Organizational culture and symbolic artifacts (pp. 147–169). Berlin: De Gruyter.
11.
CleaverF. (2000). Moral ecological rationality, institutions and the management of common property resources. Development and Change, 31, 361–383.
12.
CleaverF. (2002). Reinventing institutions: Bricolage and the social embeddedness of natural resource management. The European Journal of Development Research, 14, 11–30.
13.
CunhaM.P. (2004). Organizational time: A dialectical view. Organization, 11, 271–296.
14.
DartR. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14, 411–424.
15.
DeesJ.G. (1998). Enterprising non–profits. Harvard Business Review, 76, 55–67.
16.
DeesJ.G. & AndersonB. (2003). For–profit social ventures. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education (special issue on social entrepreneurship), 2, 1–26.
Di DomenicoM., TraceyP., & HaughH. (2009). The dialectic of social exchange: Theorizing coprporate–social enterprise collaboration. Organization Studies, 30, 887–907.
19.
DouglasM. (1986). How institutions think. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
20.
DubouleD. & WilkinsA.S. (1998). The evolution of “bricolage. Trends in Genetics, 14, 54–59.
21.
EbbenJ. & JohnsonA. (2006). Bootstrapping in small firms: An empirical analysis of change over time. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 851–865.
22.
EisenhardtK.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.
23.
GartnerW.B., BirdB.J., & StarrJ.A. (1992). Acting “as if”: Differentiating entrepreneurial from organizational behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16, 13–32.
24.
GarudR. & KarnoeP. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 32, 277–300.
25.
GodinS. (1998). The bootstrapper's bible: How to start and build a business with a great idea and (almost) no money. Dover, NH: Upstart Publishing.
26.
GreeneP.G., BrushC.G., & HartM.M. (1999). The corporate venture champion: A resource based approach to role and process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23, 103–116.
27.
HarperD. (1987). Working knowledge: Skill and community in a small shop. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
HarrisonR.T., MasonC.M., & GirlingP. (2004). Financial bootstrapping and venture development in the software industry. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 16, 307–333.
29.
HattonE. (1989). Lévi–Strauss's bricolage and theorizing teachers‘ work. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 20, 74–96.
30.
HullN. (1991). Networks and bricolage: A prolegomenon to a history of 20th century American academic jurisprudence. American Journal of Legal History, 35, 307–322.
31.
JohannissonB. (2000). Networking and entrepreneurial growth. In SextonD. & LandstromH. (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship (pp. 368–386). London: Blackwell.
32.
JohannissonB. & OlaisonL. (2007). The moment of truth—Reconstructing entrepreneurship and social capital in the eye of the storm. Review of Social Economy, LXV, 55–78.
33.
KamocheK., CunhaM.P., & CunhaJ.V. (2003). Towards a theory of organizational improvisation: Looking beyond the jazz metaphor. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 2023–2051.
34.
LanzaraG.F. (1998). Self–destructive processes in institution building and some modest countervailing mechanisms. European Journal of Political Research, 33, 1–39.
35.
LanzaraG.F. & PatriottaG. (2001). Technology and the courtroom: An inquiry into knowledge making in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 38, 943–971.
36.
Lévi–StraussC. (1967). The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
MairJ., MartiI., & GanlyK. (2007). Institutional voids as spaces of opportunity. European Business Forum, 31, 35–39.
38.
MarchJ.G. & OlsenJ.P. (1975). The uncertainty of the past: Organizational ambiguous learning. European Journal of Political Research, 3, 147–171.
MinerA.S., BassoffP., & MoormanC. (2001). Organizational improvisation and learning: A field study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 304–337.
42.
PearceJ. (2003). Social enterprise in anytown. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
43.
PenroseE. (1995; orig. 1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
PeredoA.M. & ChrismanJ.J. (2006). Towards a theory of community–based enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 31, 309–328.
45.
PeredoA.M. & McLeanM. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41, 56–65.
46.
PetersonM.F. (1995). Leading Cuban–American entrepreneurs: The process of developing motives, abilities and resources. Human Relations, 48, 1193–1216.
47.
RaoH., MoninP., & DurandR. (2005). Border crossing: Bricolage and the erosion of categorical boundaries in French gastronomy. American Sociological Review, 70, 968–991.
48.
SarasvathyS.D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26, 243–263.
49.
SarasvathyS.D. (2004). Making it happen: Beyond theories of the firm to theories of firm design. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28, 519–531.
50.
SEC. (2004). Unlocking the potential: A guide to finance for social enterprises. London: Social Enterprise Coalition.
51.
ServonL.J. (1999). Bootstrap capital: Microenterprises and the American poor. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
52.
SpencerJ.W., MurthaT.P., & LenwayS.A. (2005). How governments matter to new industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 30, 321–337.
53.
StarkD.C. (1996). Recombinant property in East European capitalism. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 993–1027.
54.
StarrJ.R. & MacMillanI.C. (1990). Resource cooptation via social contracting: Resource acquisition strategies for new ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 79–92.
55.
SteyaertC. & HjorthD. (Eds.). (2006). Entrepreneurship as social change. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
56.
StraussA. (1993). Continual permutations of action. New York: De Gruyter.
57.
StraussA., SchatzmanL., EhrlichD., BucherR., & SabshinM. (1963). The hospital and its negotiated order. In FreidsonE. (Ed.), The hospital in modern society (pp. 147–169). New York: Free Press.
58.
Van AukenH. (2005). Differences in the usage of bootstrap financing among technology–based versus nontechnology–based firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 43, 93–103.
59.
VenkataramanS. & SarasvathyS.D. (2001). Strategy and entrepreneurship: Outlines of an untold story. In HittM., FreemanE., & HarrisonJ. (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management (pp. 650–668). Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell Publishers.
60.
WeickK.E. (1993a). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628–652.
61.
WeickK.E. (1993b). Organization redesign as improvisation. In HuberG. & GlickW.H. (Eds.), Organizational change and redesign (pp. 346–382). New York: Oxford University Press.
62.
WeickK.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63.
WilloughbyK.W. (2008). How do entrepreneurial technology firms really get financed, and what difference does it make?International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 5, 1–28.
64.
WinborgJ. & LandstromH. (2001). Financial bootstrapping in small businesses: Examining small business managers‘ resource acquisition behaviours. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 235–254.
65.
ZahraS.A., GedajlovichE., NeubaumD.O., & ShulmanJ.M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 519–532.
