Understanding Barriers to Intrapreneurship in Work and Social Affairs Governmental Organization (a Case Study in Iran)

Salarzehi, Habibollah; Forouharfar, Amir

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2339673

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note: The "definitional components of SE" column and some sources are added by the authors a https://ssir.org/articles/entry/social_entrepreneurship_the_case_for_definition Nicholls 2006;Dees 1998a;Gartener, 1990;Hibbert et al 2002;Austin et al 2006;Boschee, 1998;Alvord et al 2004;Mort et al 2002;Sarasvathy and Wicks 2003;Peredo and McLean 2006;Anderson and Dees 2002;Townsend and Hart 2008;Matin, 2004. Innovation a Schumpeter 1951Drucker 1985;Herbert and Link 1989;Nijkamp 2000;Galindo and Mendez 2008;Covin and Slevin 1991;Lumpkin and Dess 1996;Morris and Kuratko 2002;Kuratko et al, 2005;Zakić et al 2008;Miller and Friesen 1982;Covin and Miles 1999;Burgelman 1984;Kanter 1985;Alterowitz 1988;Naman and Slevin 1993;Zahra and Covin 1995;Rwigema and Venter 2004;Slater and Narver 2000;Smart and Conant 1994;Lumpkin and Dess 1996;Ussahawanitchakit 2007;Mohd Osman et al 2011;Salarzehi andForouharfar 2011. Seeking Opportunity Shane et al, 2003;Christiansen 1997;…”

Section: The Frequently-mentioned Characteristics Of Sementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The presence of innovation to SE is so pivotal and vital that it could not be defined without it. Innovation is the most fundamental concept for any form of entrepreneurship and accordingly for SE too (Schumpeter 1951;Drucker 1985;Herbert and Link 1989;Nijkamp 2000;Galindo and Mendez 2008;Covin and Slevin 1991;Lumpkin and Dess 1996;Morris and Kuratko 2002;Kuratko et al, 2005;Zakić et al 2008;Miller and Friesen 1982;Covin and Miles 1999;Burgelman 1984;Kanter 1985;Alterowitz 1988;Naman and Slevin 1993;Zahra and Covin 1995;Rwigema and Venter 2004;Slater and Narver 2000;Smart and Conant 1994;Lumpkin and Dess 1996;Ussahawanitchakit 2007;Mohd Osman et al 2011;Salarzehi and Forouharfar 2011). The type of innovation that SE should seek is an external type of innovation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An epistemological critique of social entrepreneurship definitions

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If entrepreneurship is amid jungle of theories and has many theorists, its social orientation or what is known as social entrepreneurship (SE) is amid arid land of theories and suffers under-theorizing which could be inherently stemmed from its diversely proposed definitions. To be situated in an embryonic pre-paradigmatic phase, getting to a more unanimous definition in this realm is the first step in laying a solid foundation for SE theorizing. As a pioneering study, the paper aims to investigate the epistemological foundations of SE definitions critically to propose a more convergent definition for SE. To fulfill this goal epistemological justifications for the definitional components of SE are presented. Therefore, it was necessary to rely on the relevant philosophical schools of thought in Epistemology (e.g. Empiricism, Internalism, Externalism, Verificationism and Falsificationism); first to discuss the controversies and oppositions to some components of the definitions for their exclusion and then to justify some other definitional components which are mostly accepted by the scholars for their inclusion in a final SE definition. Critical approach has helped us in specifying the maneuvering of thoughts in this field and determining the epistemological and definitional boundaries of SE. Finally, a more epistemologically-supported and justified definition was presented at the end of the paper. Moreover, one of the potential contributions of this paper could be its consensusmaking impact among SE scholars in defining SE phenomenon, which could also pave the way for future theorizing in SE. The originality of the paper lies in the application of Internalism, Externalism, Verificationism and Falsificationism concepts to SE definitions.

show abstract

Section: The Frequently-mentioned Characteristics Of Sementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An epistemological critique of social entrepreneurship definitions

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The public hospitals' bureaucracy promoting top-down dictatorship program with little or no input from staff at operational level contradicts the bottom-up approach, evident in intrapreneurial organizations (Kan et al, 2011); (Salarzehi & Forouharfar, 2011). This setback becomes a serious impediment towards meaningful incorporation of the innovative principle (Kan et al, 2011;Salarzehi & Forouharfar, 2011). The large size of these public institutions affects free flow of communication vertically and horizontally within the structure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This results in management's failure to promptly sport any potential talent; outdated management styles that are not inclusive; the organization holding on employees who feel threatened by impending transformation, thereby preferring the status quo. The unsupportive senior management teams towards experimentation frustrates intrapreneurial teams to embark on innovation that brings change (Salarzehi & Forouharfar, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The more restrictive policies and attitudes of senior management and staff defeat intrapreneurial efforts embarked upon by younger personnel through meaningful venture creation. Salarzehi and Forouharfar (2011) raise a concern that it is quite difficult for intrapreneurial teams working within risk avert environment, to write convincing proposals aimed at securing capital from any potential sponsor (Salarzehi & Forouharfar, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Barriers of Intraprenurship Practice at South African Public Hospitals: Perspectives of Unit Nurse Managers

Letsie¹

2021

GJHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper highlights the barriers of intrapreneurship practice experienced by unit nurse managers working within the embattled public hospitals. The qualitative study was, descriptive, explorative and contextual in nature. The focus groups’discussions shed light on the plight of front runners constantly experiencing numerous intrapreneurial barriers frustrating ideation into implementable transformative programs. The barriers identified in this study include; lack of resources, security issues affecting freedom of staff and patients, poor staff ratios impacting on the rights of staff and patients, poor communication and unfair incentivised performance management system. The minimal conceptualization of intrapreneurship being quite foreign to nursing revealed in the findings is a wakeup call for senior teams pressured to improve performance. A number of public hospitals reforms consider the salient contribution of human capital in health care being key in driving quality improvement initiatives. Capacity development measures in education and clinical practice is a sensible recommendation through empowering nurses on business inclined management strategies like intrapreneurship practice improving the health care outcomes.

show abstract

New Business Models for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management Services: Action Research With a Large Environmental Sector Company

Feger

Mermet

2020

Organization & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Businesses are increasingly called upon to contribute to efforts to protect biodiversity and natural capital. Our article presents the results of an action research conducted with a major company in the environmental sector that has been experimenting with innovative services dedicated to ecosystem management. We show the specific organizational and social challenges the company faced in upscaling this strategy due to its path dependency to its historical value creation model, and to the collective action issues that characterize biodiversity management. We introduce a new interdisciplinary theoretical framework for the development of what we refer to as “business models for ecosystem management services,” defined by the very central place they give to the achievement of measurable biodiversity performances. We then propose four such new business models designed through participatory methods that combine in a unique way a corporate value creation model with an ecological value cocreation model at the ecosystem level.

show abstract

Understanding Barriers to Intrapreneurship in Work and Social Affairs Governmental Organization (a Case Study in Iran)

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

An epistemological critique of social entrepreneurship definitions

An epistemological critique of social entrepreneurship definitions

Barriers of Intraprenurship Practice at South African Public Hospitals: Perspectives of Unit Nurse Managers

New Business Models for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management Services: Action Research With a Large Environmental Sector Company

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About