In recent years the number of women-owned firms with employees has expanded at three times the rate of all employer firms. Yet women remain underrepresented in their proportion of high-growth firms. A number of plausible explanations exist. To develop richer insights, a two-stage research project was undertaken. A mail survey was sent to a sample of female entrepreneurs to assess motives, obstacles, goals and aspirations, needs, and business identity. Based on the survey results, follow-up, indepth interviews were conducted with entrepreneurs, selecting equally from modestgrowth and high-growth ventures. In terms of quantitative findings, growth orientation was associated with whether a woman was "pushed" or "pulled" into entrepreneurship, was motivated by wealth or achievement factors, had a strong women's identity in the venture, had equity partners, and believed women faced unique selling obstacles. The qualitative research made clear that modest-and highgrowth entrepreneurs differ in how they view themselves, their families, their ventures, and the larger environment. The results of both stages suggest that growth is a deliberate choice and that women have a clear sense of the costs and benefits of growth and make careful trade-off decisions.

ABSTRACT. Social entrepreneurship activity continues to surge tremendously in market and economic systems around the world. Yet, social entrepreneurship theory and understanding lag far behind its practice. For instance, the nature of the entrepreneurial discovery phenomenon, a critical area of inquiry in general entrepreneurship theory, receives no attention in the specific context of social entrepreneurship. To address the gap, we conceptualize social entrepreneurial discovery based on an extension of corporate social responsibility into social entrepreneurship contexts. We develop a model that emphasizes mobilization and timing as underpinnings of social entrepreneurial discovery and offer distinct conceptual aspects and theoretic propositions instrumental to future social entrepreneurship research.

While heavily emphasized within for-profit organizations, little is understood regarding the role of entrepreneurial leadership in the development, growth, and sustainability of non-profit enterprises. The fundamental logic of entrepreneurship is less apparent in this context given the social mission and multiple stakeholders involved. Building on findings regarding entrepreneurial orientation (EO) within for-profit organizations, a model of antecedents, correlates, and outcomes of entrepreneurship in non-profits is developed and tested. Emphasis is placed on the relationship between EO and the market orientation (MO) of the non-profit. The findings demonstrate that entrepreneurship has a legitimate role in non-profits, and the work climate can be designed to affect levels of entrepreneurship. Further, EO is associated with aspects of market orientation, but not with financial performance. Implications are drawn for theory and practice.

Relatively little is understood about factors triggering entrepreneurial behaviour within organizations not driven by profit motives. Governance plays an important role in non-profits, particularly boards of directors. Integrating resource-based theory and entrepreneurial orientation research, we examine the influence of non-profit boards as strategic resources shaping the organization's entrepreneurial orientation and performance. In particular, we focus on the non-profit board's underlying behavioural orientations, or the extent to which the board is strategic, activist, conservative, and cohesive. Findings from a cross-sectional survey on arts and culture organizations demonstrate that three of these behavioural orientations impact levels of entrepreneurship occurring within non-profits. Higher levels of entrepreneurship affect social performance, but not financial performance.

Although an important feature of firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR), the strategic pressures behind firms’ corporate philanthropy (CP) are not well researched or understood. This research note argues that firms’ CP and firms’ corporate political activity (CPA) may share common strategic antecedents; forces in firms’ political environment may shape both CP and CPA. Using S&P 500 data in a longitudinal analysis (1997-2004), the authors find evidence suggesting that industry-level political uncertainty increases firm propensity for engaging in both CP and CPA, above and beyond the propensity to engage in either as a stand-alone strategy. The authors use this preliminary evidence to explore political marketplace contingencies for the relationship between CP and CPA. CSR literature indicates that CP can benefit firms by creating and enhancing their relational wealth and institutional legitimacy. Such benefits may also serve firm interactions with government policy makers—a dynamic largely ignored until recently. The authors’ findings may indicate that, due to its institutional signaling ability and impact on firms’ reputations, CP may allow firms to differentiate themselves or stand out from others when faced with political uncertainty, and that these outcomes should be considered when firms engage in CP.