Research on social enterprises has primarily emphasized organizational performance and social impact, while participants’ experiences remain underexplored. This study first conducted a scoping review of the current social enterprise literature and finalized 69 empirical studies to identify variability in participants’ roles, outcomes, and experiences across nonprofit and for-profit social enterprises. The review showed that participants’ involvement in decision-making processes fosters ownership and autonomy. Building on this insight, an online experiment examined how participants’ perceived control over service selections influences their help-seeking preferences across social enterprise types. The findings reveal that the perceptions of organizational type and control over service decisions significantly affected participants’ willingness to engage with and recommend social enterprises. Participants were more likely to recommend for-profit social enterprises when they perceived greater control, although the importance of control decreased when participants trusted the service provider’s expertise. These insights offer valuable implications for designing participant-centered approaches in social enterprises.
AakerJ.VohsK. D.MogilnerC. (2010). Nonprofits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 224–237.
2.
AmirkhanyanA. A.KimH. J.LambrightK. T. (2008). Does the public sector outperform the nonprofit and for-profit sectors? Evidence from a national panel study on nursing home quality and access. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management: The Journal of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, 27(2), 326–353.
3.
ArkseyH.O’malleyL. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8(1), 19–32.
4.
AtencioM.WrightE. M.BealB.McClainZ. (2019). Urban skateboarding, social enterprise groups, and community capacity-building in the San Francisco Bay area. Loisir et Société/Society and Leisure, 42(3), 432–449.
5.
BattilanaJ.SengulM.PacheA.-C.ModelJ. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: The case of work integration social enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1658–1685.
6.
BeatonE. E.Dowin KennedyE. (2021). Responding to failure: The promise of market mending for social enterprise. Public Management Review, 23(5), 641–664.
7.
BechlerC. J.TormalaZ. L.RuckerD. D. (2021). The attitude–behavior relationship revisited. Psychological science, 32(8), 1285–1297.
8.
BenjaminL. M. (2018). Client authority in nonprofit human service organizations. Handbook of Community Movements and Local Organizations in the St Century, 21, 141–154.
9.
BenjaminL. M. (2021). Bringing beneficiaries more centrally into nonprofit management education and research. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 50(1), 5–26.
10.
BenjaminL. M. (2022). How helping can reinforce or attenuate status inequalities: The case of nonprofit organizations. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 8(7), 210–227.
11.
BenjaminL. M.EbrahimA.GugertyM. K. (2023). Nonprofit organizations and the evaluation of social impact: A research program to advance theory and practice. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 52(Suppl. 1), 313S–352S.
12.
Ben-NerA.HamannD. J.RenT. (2018). Does ownership matter in the selection of service providers? Evidence from nursing home consumer surveys. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(6), 1271–1295.
13.
Ben-NerA.Karaca-MandicP.RenT. (2012). Ownership and quality in markets with asymmetric information: Evidence from nursing homes. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 12(1).
14.
BerzinS. C.LeeH.LeongA. D. (2018). Social entrepreneurship as intervention: Findings from a venture development program for marginalized youth. Child & Youth Services, 39(4), 211–227.
15.
BlakeJ. (2019). Utilising a MacIntyrean approach to understand how social enterprise may Contribute to wellbeing. Social Enterprise Journal, 15(4), 421–437.
16.
CalóF.RoyM. J.DonaldsonC.TeasdaleS.BaglioniS. (2019). Exploring the contribution of social enterprise to health and social care: A realist evaluation. Social Science & Medicine, 222, 154–161.
17.
ChanA. (2016). Personal wellbeing of participants of social purpose enterprises: The influence of social support. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27, 1718–1741.
18.
ChanA.RyanS.QuarterJ. (2017). Supported social enterprise: A modified social welfare organization. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(2), 261–279.
19.
ChapmanC. M.HornseyM. J.GillespieN. (2021). No global crisis of trust: A longitudinal and multinational examination of public trust in nonprofits. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 50(2), 441–457.
20.
CookM.WillettsM. C. (2019). Affiliations for homeless individuals through social enterprise employment. Social Enterprise Journal, 15(2), 215–232.
21.
CostaE.AndreausM. (2021). Social impact and performance measurement systems in an Italian social enterprise: A participatory action research project. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 33(3), 289–313.
22.
DartR. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14(4), 411–424.
23.
Dávila-AguirreM. C.HanleyL. M.Lozano-FernándezG.LyonsT. S. (2014). Leveraging low income farmers’ performance through empowerment: Analysis of a sustainable initiative in Mexico. Management & Marketing. Challenges for the Knowledge Society, 9(2), 175–192.
24.
DefournyJ.NyssensM. (2017). Fundamentals for an international typology of social enterprise models. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28, 2469–2497.
25.
DefournyJ.NyssensM.BrolisO. (2021). Testing social enterprise models across the world: Evidence from the “International Comparative Social Enterprise Models (ICSEM) project.”Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 50(2), 420–440.
26.
EikenberryA. M. (2009). Refusing the market: A democratic discourse for voluntary and nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(4), 582–596.
27.
EikenberryA. M.KluverJ. D. (2004). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk?. Public administration review, 64(2), 132–140.
28.
EisingerichA. B.ChunH. H.LiuY.JiaH. M.BellS. J. (2015). Why recommend a brand face-to-face but not on Facebook? How word-of-mouth on online social sites differs from traditional word-of-mouth. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 120–128.
29.
ElmesA. I. (2019). Health impacts of a WISE: A longitudinal study. Social Enterprise Journal, 15(4), 457–474.
30.
FergusonK. M.IslamN. (2008). Conceptualizing outcomes with street-living young adults: Grounded theory approach to evaluating the social enterprise intervention. Qualitative Social Work, 7(2), 217–237.
31.
GalaskiewiczJ.BarringerS. N. (2012). Social enterprises and social categories. In Social enterprises: An organizational perspective (pp. 47–70). Palgrave Macmillan.
32.
GalaskiewiczJ.ColmanM. S. (2006). Collaboration between corporations and nonprofit organizations. The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook, 2, 180–204.
33.
GarrowE.HasenfeldY. (2012). Managing conflicting institutional logics: Social service versus market. In Social enterprises: An organizational perspective (pp. 121–143). Palgrave Macmillan.
34.
GarrowE. E.HasenfeldY. (2014). Social enterprises as an embodiment of a neoliberal welfare logic. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(11), 1475–1493.
35.
HandyF.SetoS.WakarukA.MerseyB.MejiaA.CopelandL. (2010). The discerning consumer: Is nonprofit status a factor?Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(5), 866–883.
36.
HartleyS. E. (2017). Service users’ perceptions of an outreach wellbeing service: A social enterprise for promoting mental health. Community Mental Health Journal, 53, 842–851.
37.
HaughH. M.TalwarA. (2016). Linking social entrepreneurship and social change: The mediating role of empowerment. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 643–658.
38.
HayhurstL. M. (2014). The ‘girl effect’and martial arts: Social entrepreneurship and sport, gender and development in Uganda. Gender, Place & Culture, 21(3), 297–315.
39.
HendersonF.SteinerA.MazzeiM.DochertyC. (2020). Social enterprises’ impact on older people’s health and wellbeing: Exploring Scottish experiences. Health Promotion International, 35(5), 1074–1084.
40.
HoM. H.DuffyB.BenjaminL. M. (2023). Documents in a field of action: Using documents to address research questions about nonprofit and voluntary organizations. Voluntas, 34(1), 133–139.
41.
HuiM. K.BatesonJ. E. (1991). Perceived control and the effects of crowding and consumer choice on the service experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 174–184.
42.
IshakS.OmarA. R. C.MoenJ. A. (2015). World-view, locus of control and entrepreneurial orientation in social entrepreneurship endeavour. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3), 592–601.
43.
KasserV. G.RyanR. M. (1999). The relation of psychological needs for autonomy and relatedness to vitality, well-being, and mortality in a nursing home 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(5), 935–954.
44.
KellyD.SteinerA.MazzeiM.BakerR. (2019). Filling a void? The role of social enterprise in addressing social isolation and loneliness in rural communities. Journal of Rural Studies, 70, 225–236.
45.
KerlinJ. A. (2013). Defining social enterprise across different contexts: A conceptual framework based on institutional factors. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 42(1), 84–108.
46.
KumarA. (2013). Women entrepreneurs in a masculine society: Inclusive strategy for sustainable outcomes. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 21(3), 373–384.
47.
LangerE. J.RodinJ. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(2), 191.
48.
Lorenzo-AfableD.Lips-WiersmaM.SinghS. (2020). ‘Social’ value creation as care: The perspective of beneficiaries in social entrepreneurship. Social Enterprise Journal, 16(3), 339–360.
49.
MaierF.MeyerM.SteinbereithnerM. (2016). Nonprofit organizations becoming business-like: A systematic review. Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, 45(1), 64–86.
50.
McAuleyE.DuncanT.TammenV. V. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting: A confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60(1), 48–58.
51.
McKinnonK.KennedyM.BarraketJ.DeCottaT. (2020). Is being in work good for wellbeing? Work Integration Social Enterprises in regional Australia. Australian Geographer, 51(3), 361–375.
52.
MirabellaR. M.EikenberryA. M. (2017). The missing “social” in social enterprise education in the United States. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(2), 729–748.
53.
MunnZ.PetersM. D.SternC.TufanaruC.McArthurA.AromatarisE. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, 1–7.
54.
MuralidharS.BossenC.MehraA.O’NeillJ. (2018). Digitizing monetary ecologies: Intended and unintended consequences of introducing a financial management app in a low-resource setting. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2(CSCW), 1–17.
55.
OhanaM.MeyerM.SwatonS. (2013). Decision-making in social enterprises: Exploring the link between employee participation and organizational commitment. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(6), 1092–1110.
56.
OngD.ShangL.ChandraY.HamidiM.WahabH. A. (2021). The role of social entrepreneurship for youth purpose development. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 14(2), 272–290.
PeredoB.WurzelmannS. (2015). Indigenous tourism and social entrepreneurship in the Bolivian Amazon. International Indigenous Policy Journal, 6(4), 1–26.
59.
QuilloyK.NewmanA.PymanA. (2024). Antecedents of the social impact of social enterprises: A systematic review and agenda for future research. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 53(3), 689–715.
60.
RodinJ.LangerE. J. (1977). Long-term effects of a control-relevant intervention with the institutionalized aged. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(12), 897.
61.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
62.
SandbergB. (2013). The road to market. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 35(1), 28–45.
63.
SuykensB.MaierF.MeyerM.VerschuereB. (2023). Business-like and still serving society? Investigating the relationship between NPOs being business-like and their societal roles. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 52(3), 682–703.
64.
TeasdaleS. (2010). How can social enterprise address disadvantage? Evidence from an inner city community. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 22(2), 89–107.
65.
WalkM.Cart-TurnerL.PetersonE.KlippelA. (2024). Organizational change in the nonprofit context: A scoping review of the literature. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 54(5), 1043–1071.
66.
WalkM.GreenspanI.CrossleyH.HandyF. (2015a). Mind the Gap: Expectations and experiences of clients utilizing job-training services in a social enterprise. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 86(2), 221–244.
67.
WalkM.GreenspanI.CrossleyH.HandyF. (2015b). Social return on investment analysis: A case study of a job and skills training program offered by a social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 26(2), 129–144.
68.
WeinsteinN.RyanR. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 222.
69.
WiltonR.EvansJ. (2016). Social enterprises as spaces of encounter for mental health consumers. Area, 48(2), 236–243.
70.
WongphukaK.Chai-AroonT.PhainoiS.Boon-LongP. (2017). Social entrepreneur competencies of social activists involved with children and youths: A case study of Nan province, Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(2), 143–149.
71.
XuC. (2020). The perceived differences: The sector stereotype of social service providers. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(6), 1293–1310.
72.
YoungD. R.LecyJ. D. (2014). Defining the universe of social enterprise: Competing metaphors. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 25, 1307–1332.
73.
ZeithamlV. A.BerryL. L.ParasuramanA. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31–46.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
