Factors Stimulating Social Innovation in Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Evidence of Inter-Organizational Alliances in Italy

Abstract

This article will focus on the meaning of social innovation, which could represent the tipping point of the modern entrepreneurship phenomenon, allowing it to reach a larger scale and increase its social benefits. After having described the definition of social entrepreneurship and how it may be influenced by inter-organizational social arrangements, we will analyze the Italian scenario, which is particularly significant for investigating inter-organizational alliances and their social outcomes. Specifically, the focus will be on inter-organizational alliances in the Region of Tuscany, underlining how the Third Sector is capable of creating both direct and indirect effects on social innovation, thus becoming a possible turning point for modern societal evolution. Consequently, the article will conclude with theoretical propositions concerning the direct and indirect effects that inter-organizational alliances have on social entrepreneurship, thus emphasizing the positive outcomes that such interactions have both on the financial equilibrium of the organizations and on their organizational structure.

Bricolage and Social Entrepreneurship to Address Emergent Social Needs: A “Deconstructionist” Perspective

“…The concepts of social entrepreneurship and bricolage are strictly related to the traditional entrepreneurship's definition "to take into one's own hand" (Tapsell & Woods, 2010, p. 536; see also Kickul, Griffiths & Gundry, 2010;Kickul, Bacq & Garud, 2013;Gundry, Kickul, Griffiths & Bacq, 2011a). However, on the one hand, social entrepreneurs aim to exploit opportunities in an innovative way in order to address social needs and offer social transformations (Tan, Williams & Tan, 2005;Mair & Martì, 2006;Bacq & Janssen, 2011;Starnawska, 2015;Zollo et al, 2016b;Zollo, Pellegrini, Faldetta & Rialti, 2017b hand, bricoleurs seek to reorganize and recombine the already available and often neglected resources, by spontaneously applying them to address new opportunities and unpredicted challenges so as to create value (Ciborra, 1996;Baker et al, 2003;Garud & Karnøe, 2003;Baker & Nelson, 2005;Pellegrini et al, 2016;Zollo, Pellegrini & Ciappei, 2016c;Zollo, Rialti, Ciappei & Boccardi, 2017c). According to Gundry and colleagues (Gundry et al, 2011a;Gundry et al, 2011b), because social entrepreneurs have to constantly cope with resource-constrained environments, their ability to creatively and innovatively combine available resources to solve unexpected problems -which is referred to as bricolage -emerges as crucial in modern economic scenarios (see also Griffiths, Gundry & Kickul, 2013).…”

“…Subsidiarity refers to the local institutional network that provides services to the community since Governmental Institutions have to intervene only when the organized community, i.e., the Third Sector, cannot. However, in case of government failure, the Third Sector which is composed of NPOs including Misericordia is able to integrate from the bottom the deficiencies of the State (Zollo et al, 2016b). For example, Misericordia filled socio-health public voids thanks to (a) medical and diagnostic interventions at low prices in comparison with regional tickets; (b) opening of information points aimed at therapeutic and clinic treatment for people in a confused state of mind; (c) mobile medical clinics on NPOs' ambulances for socio-health services; (d) creation of touristic emergency medical services; (e) few interventions of civil defence in small environmental contingencies.…”

“…However, despite the traditional attention of literature on commercial entrepreneurship, as a consequence of the recent attention on sustainable growth and the satisfaction of social needs, such important entrepreneurial topics of research have started to be addressed to social issues and societal challenges too. Hence, social entrepreneurship is emerging as one of the most significant issues within entrepreneurship literature (Mair, Battilana, & Cardenas, 2012;Zollo, Marzi, Boccardi, & Surchi, 2015;Zollo, Rialti, Ciappei, & Pellegrini, 2016b).…”

“…In spite of these significant differences, it is possible to identify a point of contact between traditional or commercial entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship. In fact, just as commercial entrepreneurs have to arrange a resource-constrained scenario in order to create economic value (Stevenson & Jarillo, 1990), social entrepreneurs have to gather, rearrange, and reinterpret the available resources for the creation of the social value (Zahra, Gedajlovic, Neubaum & Shulman, 2009;Di Domenico, Haugh & Tracey, 2010;Zollo et al, 2016b). In this regard, the typical ability of an entrepreneur to rearrange, reinterpret and exploit the stock of available resources has been assimilated to the anthropological notion of 'bricolage' (Lévi-Strauss, 1966), which represents the main focus of the present research.…”

Untitled

“…However, despite the traditional attention of literature on commercial entrepreneurship, as a consequence of the recent attention on sustainable growth and the satisfaction of social needs, such important entrepreneurial topics of research have started to be addressed to social issues and societal challenges too. Hence, social entrepreneurship is emerging as one of the most significant issues within entrepreneurship literature (Mair, Battilana, & Cardenas, 2012;Zollo, Marzi, Boccardi, & Surchi, 2015;Zollo, Rialti, Ciappei, & Pellegrini, 2016b). Social entrepreneurship has been identified as the form of entrepreneurship characterized not exclusively by the pursuit of economic goals but also by the pursuit of social and environmental objectives (Mair, Battilana & Cardenas, 2012).…”