Motives, Supporting Activities, and Selection Criteria of Social Impact Incubators: An Experimental Conjoint Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 089976402110574
Author(s):  
Mirko Hirschmann ◽  
Alexandra Moritz ◽  
Joern H. Block
Keyword(s):  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Enterprises ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Societal Problem ◽  
Financial Motive ◽  
New Type ◽  
Founding Team

Social impact incubators (SIIs) are a new type of incubator that support social enterprises (SEs) in their early business stages to foster and develop their hybrid objectives. However, research on SIIs is still scarce, and little is known about SIIs’ motives, supporting activities, and selection criteria. In investigating 71 SII decision-makers, we find the societal duty motive stated as “most important,” while the financial motive is stated as “least important.” Furthermore, we identify the authenticity of the founding team and the importance of the societal problem addressed as SIIs’ most important selection criteria. However, significant heterogeneity exists within the group of SIIs with regard to their selection criteria. In particular, SIIs with strong innovation and societal duty motives stand out and differ in their SE selection criteria from other SIIs. Our results extend prior research on SIIs and contribute to the discussion on the selection criteria of SE supporters.

People versus Policies: Decision-makers have divergent preferences for decisions about individuals and equivalent policies that affect individuals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Mauricio Munguia Gomez ◽  
Emma Levine
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
College Admissions ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Preference Reversal ◽  
Lay People ◽  
Admissions Officers ◽  
New Type ◽  
Selection Policies

Across nine main studies (N = 7,024) and nine supplemental studies (N = 3,279), we find that people make systematically different choices when choosing between individuals and choosing between equivalent policies that affect individuals. In college admissions and workplace hiring contexts, we randomly assigned participants to select one of two individuals or choose one of two selection policies. People were significantly more likely to choose a policy that would favor a disadvantaged candidate over a candidate with objectively higher achievements than they were to favor a specific disadvantaged candidate over a specific candidate with objectively higher achievements. We document these divergent choices among admissions officers, working professionals, and lay people, using both within-subject and between-subject designs, and across a range of stimuli and decision contexts. We find evidence that these choices diverge because thinking about policies causes people to rely more on their values and less on the objective attributes of the options presented, which overall, leads more people to favor disadvantaged candidates in selection contexts. This research documents a new type of preference reversal in important, real-world decision contexts, and has practical and theoretical implications for understanding why our choices so frequently violate our espoused policies.

scholarly journals Up to No Good? Gender, Social Impact Work, and Employee Promotions

2021 ◽  
pp. 000183922110206
Author(s):  
Christiane Bode ◽  
Michelle Rogan ◽  
Jasjit Singh
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Male Gender ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Gender Beliefs ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Male Gender Role ◽  
Promotion Rates ◽  
Vignette Experiment

Firms increasingly offer employees the opportunity to participate in firm-sponsored social impact initiatives expected to benefit the firm and employees. We argue that participation in such initiatives hinders employees’ advancement in their firms by reducing others’ perceptions of their fit and commitment. Because social impact work is more congruent with female than male gender role stereotypes, promotion rates will be lower for participating men, and male evaluators will be less likely than female evaluators to recommend promotion for male participants. Using panel data on 1,379 employees of a consulting firm, we find significantly lower promotion rates for male participants relative to female participants, female non-participants, and male non-participants. A vignette experiment involving 893 managers shows that lower promotion rates are due to lower perceptions of fit, but not commitment, and greater bias against male participants by male evaluators. Taken together, the results of the two studies suggest that the negative effect of participation on promotion is conditional upon participant and evaluator gender, underscoring the role of gender in evaluation of social impact work. In settings in which decision makers are predominately male, gender beliefs may limit male employees’ latitude to contribute to the firm’s social impact agenda.

scholarly journals Rediscovering the Cooperative Enterprise: A Systematic Review of Current Topics and Avenues for Future Research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andres Felipe Camargo Benavides ◽  
Michel Ehrenhard
Keyword(s):  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Social Enterprises ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Generation Process ◽  
Managerial Practices ◽  
Organizational Perspective ◽  
Multilevel Studies ◽  
Cooperative Enterprise ◽  
Organizational Literature

AbstractFor decades, the cooperative enterprise (CE) produces market goods and/or provides services in the interest to its members, such as communities, customers, and suppliers. The upsurge of interest in social enterprises, and their balancing of social and economic interests, has also led to a renewed interest in CEs, often seen as a specific type of social enterprise. However, from an organizational perspective, this renewed interest has been both limited and scattered over a variety of fields. In this paper, we systematically review papers on CE in the mainstream organizational literature, defined as literature in the fields of economics, business, management and sociology. Our review integrates and synthesizes the current topics in the mainstream organizational literature and provides a number of avenues for future research. In addition, we compare our findings in the organizational literature to the social issues literature as these appeared to be quite complimentary. We found multilevel studies, determination of social impact—in particular measurable impact, managerial practices for sustainable (organisational) development, and the entrepreneurial opportunity generation process as the four key avenues for future research.

scholarly journals CURRENT ISSUES OF INVESTMENT PROJECT EVALUATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 792-798
Author(s):  
O.D. Golovina ◽  
O.A. Vorobyova
Keyword(s):  
Project Management ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Investment Project ◽  
Project Performance ◽  
Project Managers ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Project Development ◽  
Strategic Development ◽  
Entire Complex

Evaluation of investment project performance indicators is one of the most important components of project management in any organization. It is carried out at every stage of project development and implementation, up to its completion. Due to the insufficient resources of companies to implement a set of projects, it is almost always necessary to select one or several projects from the entire complex. At the same time, one of the main selection criteria is the maximum compliance of the project with the company's strategic development vector. When calculating quantitative values that serve as a measure of evaluation for project selection, various kinds of inconsistencies and discrepancies between indicators often occur, which requires special attention from investors, project managers and other categories of decision-makers. The article discusses the main, fairly typical situations associated with the evaluation of real projects that arise in the practice of investment activities of companies.

scholarly journals Oddziaływanie społeczne przedsiębiorstw społecznych w teorii i praktyce

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Izabela Grabowska
Keyword(s):  
Social Services ◽  
Balanced Scorecard ◽  
Return On Investment ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Enterprises ◽  
Economic Perspective ◽  
The Public ◽  
Change Measurement ◽  
Social Return On Investment

The publication is devoted to issues related to the development of tools for measuring social impact generated by social enterprises. A valuable aspect of the monograph is the inclusion of case studies of selected tools (such as social return on investment, local multiplier, balanced scorecard) in partnership with social enterprises. The authors pay special attention to solutions enabling the operationalization of social change measurement, taking into account not only financial but, above all, non-financial aspects. They believe that the measurement of impact should take into account not only the economic perspective, but also the public and social one, where values other than material profit also count. The tools should indicate the responsibility of entities towards various types of stakeholders and serve to increase the quality of social services by providing valuable information to individual organizations.

Increasing social impact among social enterprises and traditional firms

2020 ◽  
pp. 251-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Dowin Kennedy ◽  
Erynn Beaton ◽  
Nardia Haigh
Keyword(s):  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Enterprises

Performance Measurement in Social Enterprises

2019 ◽  
pp. 205-231
Author(s):  
Ayla Zehra Öncer
Keyword(s):  
Performance Management ◽  
Balanced Scorecard ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Social Enterprises ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Impact Measurement ◽  
Expected Return ◽  
Benefit Cost Ratio ◽  
Benefit Cost

This chapter begins with the notion of performance management and then focuses on the concept of social impact in order to deeply examine the measurement of performance in social enterprises. The chapter argues the importance of measuring social impact which is the crucial process in social investment and discusses which measurement method to choose. It then introduces the classification of methods in various forms based on the related literature. The chapter continues by explaining the most frequently used social impact measurement methods including cost effectiveness and cost benefit analyses, social accounting and auditing, SROI, balanced scorecard, SIMPLE, benefit-cost ratio, BACO ratio, expected return metric, cost per impact, and blended value. Finally, the conclusion focuses on the overall perspective of the subject, critical areas to pay attention to, and limitations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document