Journal of  Entrepreneurship and Innovation Research

Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Research

Sociological analysis of agency and practice of social entrepreneurship: studying the legitimacy of social problem solving with the approach of coexistence

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 PhD of Development & Economic Sociology, Tehran, Iran.
2 Department of Technology and Innovation Management, Faculty of Industrial Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Natural Resources, Faculty of Natural Resources and Desertology, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran.
Abstract
Objective: The main aim of the paper is the sociological analysis of agency and action with approach of duality. The role of agency and action in solving social problems is in the social entrepreneurship system. The duality has the function of eliminating the dualism of action and agency in the social system, which creates new possibilities for social entrepreneurs. Therefore, it is a concept derived from the explanation of consanguinity to solve the social problem.
Method: The research method is applied in terms of objective and in terms of qualitative data collection - interpretive phenomenological analysis. The use of interpretive phenomenology to identify the legitimacy of social problem solving is the duality of action and agency in the social entrepreneurship system. The studied community is all social entrepreneurs (individual level of analysis) who are trying to solve social problems at the community level. Sampling of social entrepreneurs was done in 2 general and organizational criteria, and the emphasis of qualitative sampling is based on saturation of the inductive theme, and 10 interviews were conducted. The data collection tool is a deep interview, and the interview questions were formulated with the 5W1H approach. Analysis of interviews according to the analysis process including a) reading and re-reading the interview text; b) initial points or verbal statement; c) Development of new or emerging themes; d) searching for connections with emergent themes; z) Searching for patterns among items or participants.
 Findings: The results show that the Duality of agenc and the practice of social entrepreneurship is located in a primary, symbolic and continuous duality coordinate. To put it better, social entrepreneurs start to legitimize solving social problems through inbreeding based on primary inbreeding (sociability); They are engraved with symbolic inbreeding, and with continuous inbreeding, they create institutionalization to solve social problems.
Keywords

Subjects


بهروزآذر، زهرا، الیاسی، قاسم، کیهانی، مریم، آراستی، زهرا، و احمدپور، محمود. (1403). ترسیم ساختار دانش و شکاف‌های پژوهشی عاملیت در کارآفرینی. پژوهش‌های کارآفرینی و نوآوری، 3(3)، 18–41. https://doi.org/10.22034/eir.2024.479124.1103
مقیمی اسفندآبادی، حسین، و معینی، سید رضا. (1398). واکاوی جامعه‌شناختی چالش‌های بیرونی خلق ارزش اجتماعی رهبران کارآفرینی اجتماعی با رویکرد عادت‌واره بوردیو. توسعه کارآفرینی، 12(4)، 581–600.
مقیمی اسفندآبادی، حسین، معینی، سید رضا، و یداللهی فارسی، جهانگیر. (1402). واکاوی رفتارهای حل مساله اجتماعی در بین رهبران کارآفرین اجتماعی. پژوهش‌های کارآفرینی و نوآوری، 2(2)، 65–80.
یادگار، ندا، بازرگان، عباس، و فقیه، نجمه. (1390). فرآیند شکل‌گیری ابتکارات کارآفرینانه اجتماعی: الگویی برگرفته از نظریه برخاسته از داده‌ها. توسعه کارآفرینی، 4(13)، 7–29.
 
Akar, H., & Üstüner, M. (2017). Mediation Role of Self-Efficacy Perceptions in the Relationship between Emotional Intelligence Levels and Social Entrepreneurship Traits of Pre-Service Teachers. In Journal of Education and Future.
Alexander, J. (1988). Action and Its Environments: Toward a New Synthesis. Columbia University Press.
Alkire, S. (2008). Concepts and Measure of Agency. In Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI): Vol. (Issue). www.ophi.org.uk
Archer, M. (2003). Structure, Agency and the Internal Conversation. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
Archer, M. S. (2000). For structure: its reality, properties and powers: A reply to Anthony King. In The sociological Review (pp. 464–472). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Arslan, A., Ahokangas, P., Haapanen, L., Golgeci, I., & Tarba, S. Y. (2022). Generational differences in organizational leaders: an interpretive phenomenological analysis of work meaningfulness in the Nordic high-tech organizations. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 180(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121717
Baptista, N., Pereira, J., Moreira, A. C., & Matos, N. De. (2019). Exploring the meaning of social innovation: a categorisation scheme based on the level of policy intervention, profit orientation and geographical scale. Innovation: Organization and Management, 21(3), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2019.1585188
Bhaskar, R., & Norrie, A. (1998). Introduction:Dialectic and Dialectical critical Realism. In M. Archer, R. Bhaskar, A. Collier, T. Lawson, & A. Norrie (Eds.), Critical Realism (pp. 561–574). Routledge.
Blumer, H. (1969). Society as Symbolic Interaction. In Symbolic Interactionism. In Perspective and Method (pp. 78–89). University of California Press.
Blumer, H. (1971). SOCIAL PROBLEMS AS COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR. Social Problem, 156–156. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp/books/12236_12
Bosma, N., Hill, S., Kelley, D., Guerrero, M., Schott, T., & Ionescu-Somers, A. (2021). GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2020/2021. In GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Combridge University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Force of Law : Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field. Hastings, 38, 805–853. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/hastlj38&div=33&id=&page=
Bruno, S., & Jaiswal, S. . (2016). Understanding the challenges and strategic actions of social entrepreneurship at base of the pyramid. Management Decision, 54(2), 418–440. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2014-0662
Burglund, H. (2007). Researching entrepreneurship as lived experience.
Burk, K. (1969). Grammar of Motives. University of California Press.
Busenitz, L. W., Sharfman, M. P., Townsend, D. M., & Harkins, J. A. (2015). The Emergence of Dual-Identity Social Entrepreneurship: Its Boundaries and Limitations. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 7(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2014.987801
Buttriss, G. J., & Wilkinson, I. F. (2007). Using narrative sequence methods to advance international entrepreneurship theory. Journal International Entrepreneurship, 4, 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-007-0012-4
Caetano, A. (2015). Defining personal reflexivity: A critical reading of Archer’s approach. European Journal of Social Theory, 18(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431014549684
Chandra, Y. (2017). Social Entrepreneurship as Institutional-Change Work: A Corpus Linguistics Analysis. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 14–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2016.1233133
Chia, R., & Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as Practical Coping: a Heideggerian Perspective. Organization Studies, 27(5), 635–655. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1177/0170840606064102
Collingridge, D. S., & Gantt, E. E. (2019). The Quality of Qualitative Research *. American Journal of Medical Quality, 34(5), 449–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/1062860619873187
Crossley, N. (2001). The phenomenological habitus and its construction. Theory and Society, 30, 81–120.
Davies, B. (1990). Agency as a Form of Discursive Practice . A Classroom Scene Observed. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 11(3), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569900110306
Dew, N., Read, S., Sarasvathy, S. D., & Wiltbank, R. (2009). Effectual versus predictive logics in entrepreneurial decision-making: Differences between experts and novices. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(4), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.02.002
Dutta, D. ., & Crossan, M. M. (2005). The Nature of Entrepreneurial Opportunities: Understanding the Process Using the 4I Organizational Learning Framework. Journal of Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 425–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00092.x
Eatough, V., & Smith, J. A. (2017). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. In W. C. and S.-R. W. (eds.) (Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 193–211). SAGE Publications.
Elias, N. (1991). The Society of Individuals. Basil Blackwell.
Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a Relational Sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317. https://doi.org/doi/abs/10.1086/231209
Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What Is Agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023. https://doi.org/doi/abs/10.1086/231294
Eteläpelto, A., Vähäsantanen, K., Hökkä, P., & Paloniemi, S. (2013). What is agency ? Conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educational Research Review, 10, 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.05.001
Evans,Paul, A. . (1999). HRM on the edge:A Duality Perspective. Organization, 6(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/135050849962010
Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyod Dualism : Stability and Change as a Duality. Academy of Mamagement Review, 35(2), 202–225. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.2.zok202
Frank, K. (2006). Agency. Anthropological Theory, 6(3), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499606066889
Garfinkel, H. (1986). Ethno methodological Studies of Work. Routledge.
Gartner, W. B., Shaver, K. G., Gatewood, E., & Katz, J. A. (1994). Finding the Entrepreneur in Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(3), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401800301
Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., & Karnoe, P. (2010). Path Dependence or Path Creation? Journal of Management Studies, 47(4), 760–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00914.x
Ghalwash, S., Tolba, A., & Ismail, A. (2017). What motivates social entrepreneurs to start social ventures? Social Enterprise Journal, 13(3), 268–298. https://doi.org/10.1108/sej-05-2016-0014
Giddens, A. (1979). Time , Space , Social Change. In Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis (pp. 198–233).
Giddens, A. (1983). Comments on the Theory of Structuration. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 13(1), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1983.tb00463.x
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory structuration in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California press.
Goffman, W., & Newill, V. A. (1967). Communication and Epidemic Processes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 298(1454), 316–334. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1967.0106
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure : The Problem of Embeddedness ’. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510. https://doi.org/doi/abs/10.1086/228311
Heinämaa, S. (2017). This is an electronic reprint of the original article . This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail . In S. J. K. A. Garry & & A. Stone (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Feminist Philosophy (pp. 180–193). Routledge Philosophy Companions. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315758152-15
Herepath, A. (2014). In the Loop : A Realist Approach to Structure and Agency in the Practice of Strategy. Organization, 35(6), 857–879. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613509918
Hervieux, C., & Voltan, A. (2018). Framing Social Problems in Social Entrepreneurship discourse analysis. Journal Business Ethics, 151, 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3252-1
Hlady-Rispal, M., & Servantie, V. (2018). Deconstructing the Way in which Value Is Created in the Context of Social Entrepreneurship. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12113
Jackson, W. . (1999). Dualism, duality and the complexity of economic institutions. International Journal of Social Economics, 454–558. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/03068299910215997
Koe Hwee Nga, J., & Shamuganathan, G. (2010). The Influence of Personality Traits and Demographic Factors on Social Entrepreneurship. In Source: Journal of Business Ethics (Vol. 95, Issue 2). http://www.jstor.org/stable/40785086%0A
Kustermans, J. (2016). Parsing the Practice Turn : Practice , Practical Knowledge , Practices. Millennium Journal of International Studies, 44(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829815613045
Lewis, K. V. (2016). Identity capital: an exploration in the context of youth social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 28(3–4), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2016.1155741
Lubinski, C. (2018). From ‘ History as Told ’ to ‘ History as Experienced ’: Contextualizing the Uses of the Past. Organization Studies, 39(12), 1785–1809. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618800116
Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH: A SOURCE OF EXPLANATION, PREDICTION, AND DELIGHT Abstract. IESE Business School, 1–19.
McMullen, J. S., Brownell, K. M., & Adams, J. (2021a). What Makes an Entrepreneurship Study Entrepreneurial? Toward A Unified Theory of Entrepreneurial Agency. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 45(5), 1197–1238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720922460
McMullen, J. S., Brownell, K. M., & Adams, J. (2021b). What Makes an Entrepreneurship Study Entrepreneurial? Toward A Unified Theory of Entrepreneurial Agency. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 45(5), 1197–1238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720922460
Mcmullen, J. S., Ingram, K. M., & Adams, J. (2021). What Makes an Entrepreneurship Study Entrepreneurial? Toward A Unified Theory of Entrepreneurial Agency. 0(0), 1–42.
Mcmullen, J. S., Wood, M. S., & Kier, A. S. (2016). An Embedded Agency Approach to Enrepreneurship Public Policy:Managerial Position And Politics in new ventuew location Decisions. Academy of Management Perspectives, 30(3), 222–246.
Mead, J. (1934). Mind , Self , and Society. University of Chicago Press.
Merleau-ponty, M. (1965). The Structure of Behaviour. london:Methuen.
Munoz, P., & Cohen, B. (2018). Entrepreneurial Narratives in Sustainable Venturing: Beyond People, Profit, and Planet. Journal of Small Business Management, 56, 154–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12395
Nicholls, A. (2010a). The Legitimacy of Social Entrepreneurship: Reflexive Isomorphism in a Pre-Paradigmatic Field. Entrepenruership Theory and Practice, 44(0), 611–634. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00397.x
Nicholls, A. (2010b). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre-paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4), 611–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00397.x
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice Theory, Work, and Organization: An Introduction (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Okumura, A., Ikeda, T., & Muraki, K. (1999). Text Summarization based on information extraction and categorization using 5W1H. Journal of NLP, 6(6), 27–44.
Oliveira, E., Basini, S., & Cooney, T. M. (2024). Framing a feminist phenomenological inquiry into the lived experiences of women entrepreneurs. Phenomenology of Woman Entrepreneurs, 30(11), 91–119. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-07-2023-0736
Raco, J. R., Tanod, R. H. M., Katolik, U., & Salle, D. La. (2014). The phenomenological method in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 22(3), 276–285. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2014.063776
Razavi, S. M., Asadi, M., Moghimi Esfandabadi, H., & Ekbatani, H. (2014). Design Patterns Barriers to Social Entrepreneurship: An Application of Grounded Theory (Vol. 4, Issue 16). www.iiste.org
Ritzer, G. (2008). Sociological Theory (8 th). McGraw-Hil.
Saebi, T., Foss, N. J., & Linder, S. (2019). Social Entrepreneurship Research: Past Achievements and Future Promises. Journal of Management, 45(1), 70–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318793196
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and Effectuation: Toward a theoretical Shift From Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 26(2), 243–263.
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2008). Effectuation:Elements of Entrepreneurial Expertise. In Sciences-New York. Charlottesville.
Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52, 1893–1908.
Schatzki, T. R. (1997). Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Philosophy of the Social Science, 27(3), 283–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/004839319702700301
Scollon, R. (2001). Mediated Discourse: The Nexus of Practice. Routledge.
Sengupta, S., Sahay, A., & Croce, F. (2018). Conceptualizing social entrepreneurship in the context of emerging economies: an integrative review of past research from BRIICS. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(4), 771–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0483-2
Shahverdi, M., Ismail, K., & Qureshi, M. I. (2018). The effect of perceived barriers on social entrepreneurship intention in Malaysian universities: The moderating role of education. Management Science Letters, 8(5), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2018.4.014
Smith, W. ., & Lewis, M. . (2011). ATheory of Paradox:Dynamic Equilibruim Model of Oraganizing. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 36(2), 381–403.
Starks, H., & Trinidad, S. . (2007). Choose Your Method : A Comparison of Phenomenology , Discourse Analysis , and Grounded Theory. Quality Heaith Research, 17(10), 1372–1380. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307307031
Tan, L. P., Le, A. N. H., & Xuan, L. P. (2019). A Systematic Literature Review on Social Entrepreneurial Intention. In Journal of Social Entrepreneurship (Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp. 241–256). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2019.1640770
Thompson, N. A., Verduijn, K., & Gartner, W. B. (2020). Entrepreneurship-as-practice : grounding contemporary theories of practice into entrepreneurship studies Entrepreneurship-as-practice : grounding contemporary theories of practice into entrepreneurship studies. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 32(3–4), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2019.1641978
Tran, A. T. P., & Von Korflesch, H. (2016). A conceptual model of social entrepreneurial intention based on the social cognitive career theory. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 17–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/apjie-12-2016-007
Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On Organizational Becoming : Rethinking Organizational Change Organizational Change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3086078
Urban, B., & Kujinga, L. (2017). The institutional environment and social entrepreneurship intentions. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 23(4), 638–655. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-07-2016-0218
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sense making in organizations. SAGE Publications.
Weick, K. E., & Browning, L. D. (1986). Journal of Management. Journal of Management, 12(2), 243–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638601200207
Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.007