No abstract

No abstract

PurposeThe paper's purpose is to present qualitative findings describing entrepreneurial differentiations between non‐profit organisations along a social economic continuum. The paper aims to focus on those non‐profit organisations classified as “social” and those more entrepreneurial behaving organisations classified as “social commercial”.Design/methodology/approachThe data were taken from recent research examining current classification systems and performance measurement indicators applied to not‐for‐profit and for‐profit organisations in an Irish regional context. Having reviewed the extant literature on classification systems and measurement indicators for non‐profit organisations, the social economic continuum model and theoretical measurement framework were developed. In order to test the models, the study employed a pragmatist mixed methodological approach; employing quantitative surveys and in‐depth interviews.FindingsThe paper presents key entrepreneurial differentiating themes between “social” and “social commercial” organisations, and discusses the triggers that produce a “hologram” effect or style of management in the third sector.Practical implicationsThe identification of entrepreneurial themes allows for the analysis of the non‐profit organisations from overly social in their activities and presentation, to overly economic in their behaviour. It allows for a greater understanding of the management processes employed by non‐profit organisations to create social value and meet their social aims and purpose.Originality/valueThe paper carries out a unique inter‐sector comparison of non‐profit organisations to determine entrepreneurial differentiations amongst non‐profit businesses employing entrepreneurial methodologies and behaviours to achieve social good.

The study explores how boundary-spanning is carried out to further community engagement in 15 universities of differing sizes/ages across the United Kingdom. Fifteen interviewees participated in a series of four semi-structured interviews, aged between 35-50 and with a first degree (with almost half with an MSc). One third were women. All managed their own teams and felt these were their base in negotiating difficult internal territory.. Here, boundary spanning is found to be synonymous with identity work, carried out to enable individuals to adapt to different internal and external conditions and requirements through processes of interaction and learning. It also suggests the strategic construction of identities to address perceived threats and insecurities -and the impacts of change, dominant organisational discourse and senior management on this process. Their job titles were not useful as identity badges to signal meaning, due to these being outside 'what universities are for'.

In an article in this journal Ottewill and Hudson (1997)