This conceptual article aims to respond to the poorly addressed question of the emergence of hybrid organizations; that is, organizations that embrace several institutional logics. It does so by developing a model and a set of propositions focusing on the heterogeneity of the entrepreneurial team as a possible driver for hybridity throughout the entrepreneurial process and up to the emergence of a hybrid organization. Contributing to the literatures on (collective) entrepreneurship, imprinting and hybrid organizations, we advance several avenues and conditions under which the heterogeneity of the entrepreneurial team may imprint the entrepreneurial process and lead to the creation of hybrid organizations. Our propositions connect the individual, team and organizational levels and thus, advance our understanding of how institutional logics can be combined across different levels of analysis and throughout the stages of an entrepreneurial process.

This article seeks to shed light on the diversity of scaling strategies of social enterprises, which can be considered as emblematic hybrid organizations. By comparing three Flemish renewable energy cooperatives with contrasted scaling strategies, the article shows how these strategies can be understood in relation to the organizational mission as imprinted at the founding. We extend the notion of hybridity beyond the combination of institutional logics to highlight the interest orientation (mutual vs. general interest). Unlike what is suggested in extant literature, we find that mutual interest orientation may be associated with “scale-up,” business growth strategies, while general interest orientation may lead to less growth-focused “scale-out” and “scale-deep” strategies. The findings illuminate aspects of the hybrid nature of social enterprises by explaining their diverse scaling strategies and extend the notion of imprinting to the interorganizational level by highlighting how social enterprises may collaborate to collectively achieve the pursuit of their multiple missions.

ABSTRACT

and organizational theory, we use co-operatives to explore social expectations and institutional arrangements around form at the societal, population, and organizational levels using a population ecology framework. We develop a research agenda based on propositions that address specific features of identity formation in less typical forms of organization, including tensions with normative business expectations, engagement with identity audiences, embeddedness in networks and alliances, structural factors influencing identity, and identity ambiguity.3

The centrality of user‐members in cooperatives and cooperatives' embeddedness in their community and in a global network influence positively their resilience in times of crisis, as illustrated by cases of cooperatives that acted entrepreneurially during the COVID‐19 crisis. Cooperatives are hybrid organizations that maximize value, instead of profit. They are owned, governed, and controlled by their members. They are more resilient than the conventional enterprises in times of crisis, thanks to their peculiar governance characteristics that ensure member centrality. Next to member centrality, the embeddedness of cooperatives in their local environment and a global movement enhances mission centrality as well as trust and solidarity among their members, local communities, and other cooperatives.