Clustering social enterprises: an empirically validated taxonomy

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to develop an empirically validated taxonomy. Typologies of social entrepreneurship are primarily based on conceptual considerations and case studies. There is a need for quantitative approaches and empirical testing of this emerging organizational form and its characteristics. Design/methodology/approach First, an item scale was developed that emerged from frequently mentioned elements in social entrepreneurship literature. Next, social entrepreneurs rated these items. Finally, the authors conducted a cluster analysis to derive a taxonomy with three distinguishable types of social enterprises. Findings Based on a cluster analysis (N = 70), an empirically validated taxonomy is provided with three social enterprise types: social service providers, social change makers and social philanthropists. Practical implications Although this research has an exploratory character, it makes a clear contribution by complementing existing typologies, which tend to be conceptual in nature, with a taxonomy that is empirically grounded. This study defogs the blurry understanding and limited knowledge about different social enterprise forms and provides insight into meaningfully similar groups across the sector as a whole. Originality/value This article fills a void of empirically grounded taxonomies by analyzing which definitional aspects of social entrepreneurship literature correspond to the perceptions of social entrepreneurs regarding the nature of their organizations.

Human capital and AI in industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia

“…Choi and Chang (2019) think that there's a need for partnership in purchase of resources for a new social companyfor ensuring its sustainability. Erpf et al (2019) think that there's a need for clustering of social companies for strengthening their market positions. Frumkin (2013) comes to the conclusion that non-profit management of social entrepreneurship reduces its competitiveness in the markets, which include commercial and non-commercial companies (e.g., markets of medical and educational services).…”

Personenbezogene Merkmale von Social Entrepreneuren (SE), Einstellungen & Motive

“…2.1.5;Abschn. 2.2;Miculaiciuc, 2019;Ţigu, Iorgulescu, Rȃvar & Lile, 2015;Jarrodi, Byrne & Bureau, 2019; zur Übersicht zu SEO-Typologie-Ansätzen siehe Erpf, Tekula & Neuenschwander, 2019). Daher werden sie an dieser Stelle nicht wieder aufgegriffen bzw.…”

Social Enterprise and Taxation Policy: A Systematic Literature Review

“…According to Erpf et al, (2019), SEs have various definitions due to the lack of rigorous methods in discussing such definitions, including different areas of treatments and perspectives. Therefore, they attempted to highlight the typologies for SEs with an empirically validated taxonomy.…”

“…Two studies concentrated on tax policies in SEs (Killian & O'Regan 2019;Radzi et al, 2021), two papers focused on public policy Choi & Park 2020), and two other studies were conducted from the financing perspective (Akbulaev et al, 2019;Subačienė et al, 2019). Most remaining papers concentrated on typology to analyze the definitions of SEs (Erpf et al, 2019). One study focused on ideology between two schools of thought on SEs in Malaysia (Harun et al, 2017).…”