درک کارآفرینی اجتماعی: یک نگرش فرهنگی در تحقیقات کسب و کار
ترجمه نشده

درک کارآفرینی اجتماعی: یک نگرش فرهنگی در تحقیقات کسب و کار

عنوان فارسی مقاله: درک کارآفرینی اجتماعی: یک نگرش فرهنگی در تحقیقات کسب و کار
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: Understanding social entrepreneurship: A cultural perspective in business research
مجله/کنفرانس: مجله تحقیقات کسب و کار – Journal of Business Research
رشته های تحصیلی مرتبط: مدیریت
گرایش های تحصیلی مرتبط: کارآفرینی، مدیریت کسب و کار
کلمات کلیدی فارسی: کارآفرینی اجتماعی، فرهنگ، جهان، GEM
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی: Social Entrepreneurship, Culture, GLOBE, GEM
نوع نگارش مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article)
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.006
دانشگاه: Parthenope University of Naples, Italy
صفحات مقاله انگلیسی: 12
ناشر: الزویر - Elsevier
نوع ارائه مقاله: ژورنال
نوع مقاله: ISI
سال انتشار مقاله: 2020
ایمپکت فاکتور: 5.352 در سال 2019
شاخص H_index: 158 در سال 2020
شاخص SJR: 1.684 در سال 2019
شناسه ISSN: 0148-2963
شاخص Quartile (چارک): Q1 در سال 2019
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی: PDF
وضعیت ترجمه: ترجمه نشده است
قیمت مقاله انگلیسی: رایگان
آیا این مقاله بیس است: بله
آیا این مقاله مدل مفهومی دارد: ندارد
آیا این مقاله پرسشنامه دارد: ندارد
آیا این مقاله متغیر دارد: دارد
کد محصول: E14240
رفرنس: دارای رفرنس در داخل متن و انتهای مقاله
فهرست مطالب (انگلیسی)

Abstract

1- Introduction

2- Theoretical framework

3- Material and methods

4- Results and discussion

5- Implications and future research directions

6- Conclusions

Acknowledgements

References

بخشی از مقاله (انگلیسی)

Abstract

This study investigates the cultural drivers of social entrepreneurship (SE), focusing on the way in which Global Leadership and Organizational Behaviour Effectiveness (GLOBE) affects social entrepreneurial activity (SEA) in different countries. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and GLOBE project were used as data sources. Cultural values, regional affiliation, and economic development levels were used to cluster the selected countries. Correlations between values and operating SEA were checked for the entire sample, as well as for each of the three clusters. A positive correlation between ‘Gender Egalitarianism’ and narrowly defined operating SEA and negative correlation between ‘Uncertainty Avoidance’ and the aforementioned SEA was confirmed for all the countries, while the linkage between ‘Future Orientation’, ‘In-group Collectivism’, and operating SEA was partially verified. Research results suggest that culture is not sufficient to justify national differences in SE rates.

Introduction

In recent years, the concept of Social Entrepreneurship (SE) has attracted the attention of both academics and practitioners, as shown by a growing body of theoretical literature as well as by the rise of new scientific and non-scientific communities (Chell, 2007; Dacin, Dacin, & Matear, 2010; Dwivedi & Weerawardena, 2018; Rey-Martí, RibeiroSoriano, & Palacios-Marqués, 2016; Zahra, Gedajlovic, Neubaum, & Shulman, 2009). Due to the fast growth of the phenomenon, emerging research areas are developing in the field of business strategy, entrepreneurship, public sector management, sociology, political science, economics, and education (Kedmenec & Strašek, 2017; Short, Moss, & Lumpkin, 2009) emphasising the need for new theoretical and practical contributions. Indeed, SE is characterised by a lack of theoretical boundaries, and is challenged by competing definitions and conceptual frameworks, gaps in the literature, and limited empirical data (Mair & Marti, 2006; Nicholls, 2006; Rey-Martí et al., 2016).

As Cukier, Trenholm, Carl, and Gekas (2011) show, the available studies about SE lack consistency in definitions and objects of focus, as well as rigorous comparative analysis. In a content analysis of 567 unique articles concerning ‘social entrepreneur’ or ‘social entrepreneurship’, the authors highlight the existing overlap between and among different levels of analysis, including studies of individuals (micro level), studies of organizations and processes (meso level), and broader studies of the economic, political and societal context (macro level). They also find that the majority of existing contributions are more theoretically grounded than empirically based.