Although behaving entrepreneurially has become increasingly important for many nonprofit organizations, research on entrepreneurial orientation (EO) lacks a clear understanding of the construct in the nonprofit context. This study examines how EO is shaped on the organizational level of a nonprofit organization and contributes to the creation of a social venture. With a qualitative research design, we explore the role of entrepreneurial elements manifested in the pre-start-up phase of social venture creation according to their importance for upstream and downstream processes. Our findings show how risk taking has a financial and a social dimension and we identify collaboration as a pivotal additional element for social EO along with proactiveness and innovativeness.
AnheierH. K. (2005). Nonprofit organizations: Theory, management, policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
AustinJ.StevensonH.Wei-SkillernJ. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both?Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1-22. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00107.x
3.
BairdI. S.ThomasH. (1985). Toward a contingency model of strategic risk taking. The Academy of Management Review, 10, 230-243.
4.
BowmanW. (2002). The uniqueness of nonprofit finance and the decision to borrow. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 12, 293-311.
5.
BrownL. D.MooreM. H. (2001). Accountability, strategy, and international nongovernmental organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 30, 569-587.
6.
CoombesS. M. T.MorrisM. H.AllenJ. A.WebbJ. W. (2011). Behavioural orientations of non-profit boards as a factor in entrepreneurial performance: Does governance matter?Journal of Management Studies, 48, 829-856. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00956.x
7.
CovinJ. G.GreenK. M.SlevinD. P. (2006). Strategic process effects on the entrepreneurial orientation–sales growth rate relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57-81.
DacinM. T.DacinP. A.TraceyP. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: A critique and future directions. Organization Science, 22, 1203-1213.
10.
DartR. (2004). Being “business-like” in a nonprofit organization: A grounded and inductive typology. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 290-310.
FlanaganJ. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulleting, 51, 327-358.
16.
FroschauerU.LuegerM. (2003). Das qualitative Interview. Stuttgart, Germany: Facultas.
17.
GeertzC. (1983). Local knowledge. New York, NY: Basic Books.
18.
GeorgeB. A.MarinoL. (2011). The epistemology of entrepreneurial orientation: Conceptual formation, modeling, and operationalization. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, 989-1024. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00455.x
19.
GibelmanM.GelmanS. R. (2001). Very public scandals: Nongovernmental organizations in trouble. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 12, 49-66. doi:10.1023/A:1011242911726
20.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine.
21.
GrasD.Mendoza-AbarcaK. I. (2014). Risky business? The survival implications of exploiting commercial opportunities by nonprofits. Journal of Business Venturing, 29, 392-404. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.05.003
22.
HaughH. (2006). Nonprofit social entrepreneurship. In ParkerS. (Ed.), The life cycle of entrepreneurial ventures (pp. 401-437). New York, NY: Springer.
23.
HaughH. (2007). Community-led social venture creation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31, 161-182. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00168.x
24.
HelmS. T.AnderssonF. O. (2010). Beyond taxonomy. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20, 259-276. doi:10.1002/nml.253
HwangH.PowellW. W. (2009). The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54, 268-298.
27.
JamesE. (1998). Commercialism among nonprofits: Objectives, opportunities, and constraints. In WeisbrodB. A. (Ed.), To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector (pp. 271-285). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
28.
JaskyteK.de RiobóM. S. R. M. (2004). Characteristics of innovative nonprofit organizations in Argentina. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 15(1), 71-79.
29.
KetokiviM.MantereS. (2010). Two strategies for inductive reasoning in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 35, 315-333. Retrieved from http://amr.aom.org/content/35/2/315.abstract
30.
KieserA. (1994). Why organization theory needs historical analyses—And how this should be performed. Organization Science, 5, 608-620.
31.
KistruckG. M.BeamishP. W. (2010). The interplay of form, structure, and embeddedness in social intrapreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34, 735-761. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00371.x
32.
KroegerA.WeberC. (2014). Developing a conceptual framework for comparing social value creation. Academy of Management Review, 39, 513-540. doi:10.5465/amr.2012.0344
33.
LangleyA. (2009). Studying processes in and around organizations. In BuchananD. A.BrymanA. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational research methods (pp. 409-429). London, England: Sage.
34.
LerouxK. M. (2005). What drives nonprofit entrepreneurship? A look at budget trends of metro Detroit social service agencies. The American Review of Public Administration, 35, 350-362. doi:10.1177/0275074005278813
35.
LightP. C. (2006, Fall). Reshaping social entrepreneurship. Stanford Social Innovation Review, pp. 45-51.
36.
LightP. C. (2008). The search for social entrepreneurship. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
LumpkinG. T.MossT. W.GrasD. M.KatoS.AmezcuaA. S. (2013). Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: How are they different, if at all?Small Business Economics, 40, 761-783.
MairJ.MartíI. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36-44. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002
41.
MairJ.SchoenO. (2007). Successful social entrepreneurial business models in the context of developing economies. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2, 54-68.
42.
MantereS.KetokiviM. (2013). Reasoning in organization science. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 70-89.
43.
MasonJ. (2002). Qualitative interviewing: Asking, listening and interpreting. In MayT.(Ed.), Qualitative research in action (pp. 225-241). London, England: Sage.
44.
McDonaldR. E. (2007). An investigation of innovation in nonprofit organizations: The role of organizational mission. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 256-281. doi:10.1177/0899764006295996
45.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (Vol. 2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
MillerD. (2011). Miller (1983) revisited: A reflection on EO research and some suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, 873-894.
48.
MillerD.FriesenP. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24, 921-933.
49.
MooreM. H. (2000). Managing for value: Organizational strategy in for-profit, nonprofit, and governmental organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(Suppl. 1), 183-208.
50.
MorrisM.CoombesS.SchindehutteM.AllenJ. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of entrepreneurial and market orientations in a non-profit context: Theoretical and empirical insights. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 12(4), 12-39.
51.
MorrisM.WebbJ.FranklinR. (2011). Understanding the manifestation of entrepreneurial orientation in the nonprofit context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, 947-971. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00453.x
52.
MortG. S.WeerawardenaJ.CarnegieK. (2003). Social entrepreneurship: Towards conceptualisation. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8(1), 76-88.
53.
MurphyP.CoombesS. (2009). A model of social entrepreneurial discovery. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 325-336.
54.
NiiniluotoI. (1999). Defending abduction. Philosophy of Science, 66, 436-451.
55.
PearceJ. A.FritzD. A.DavisP. S. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of religious congregations as predicted by rational choice theory. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 34, 219-248. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00315.x
56.
PeirceC. S. (1995). The 1903 lectures on pragmatism. Albany: State University of New York Press.
57.
RauchA.WiklundJ.LumpkinG. T.FreseM. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 33, 761-787. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00308.x
58.
SalamonL. M. (1993). The marketization of welfare: Changing nonprofit and for-profit roles in the American welfare state. The Social Service Review, 67, 16-39.
59.
SandersM. L.McClellanJ. G. (2012). Being business-like while pursuing a social mission: Acknowledging the inherent tensions in US nonprofit organizing. Organization, 21, 68-89. doi:10.1177/1350508412464894
ScottS. G.LaneV. R. (2000). A stakeholder approach to organizational identity. Academy of Management Review, 25, 43-62.
62.
ShortJ. C.MossT. W.LumpkinG. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3, 161-194. doi:10.1002/sej.69
63.
SitkinS. B.PabloA. L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. The Academy of Management Review, 17, 9-38.
64.
StakeR. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
66.
VandeVenA. H.PooleM. S. (1990). Methods for studying innovation development in the Minnesota Innovation Research Program. Organization Science, 1, 313-335.
67.
Van MaanenJ.SørensenJ. B.MitchellT. R. (2007). Introduction to special topic forum: The interplay between theory and method. The Academy of Management Review, 32, 1145-1154.
68.
WedigG. J. (1994). Risk, leverage, donations and dividends-in-kind: A theory of nonprofit financial behavior. International Review of Economics & Finance, 3, 257-278.
69.
WeerawardenaJ.MortG. S. (2006). Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. Journal of World Business, 41, 21-35.
70.
WeisbrodB. A. (1998). To profit or not to profit: The commercial transformation of the nonprofit sector. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
71.
WiklundJ.ShepherdD. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71-91.
72.
YinR. K. (2009). Applied Social Research Methods: Vol. 5, Case study research: Design and methods. London, England: Sage.
73.
YoungD. R. (2001). Organizational identity and the structure of nonprofit umbrella associations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 11, 289-304.
74.
ZahraS. A.GedajlovicE.NeubaumD. O.ShulmanJ. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24, 519-532. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.007
75.
ZahraS. A.NielsenA. P.BognerW. C. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship, knowledge, and competence development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23, 169-190.
