Search results

To investigate the application of the social enterprise model to the childcare sector in Scotland and develop a practical model for analysing such social enterprises.

A review of the literature of ideas on social enterprise found in official and academic literature is presented. The concept of “social enterprise” is reviewed with particular reference to features of the childcare sector that relate both generally and specifically to Scotland. Reports the results of a questionnaire survey, conducted in late 2005 and early 2006, involving 81 childcare organizations (27.0 per cent response rate).

The results indicated that about two‐thirds of the organizations operated at just one site, with playgroups tending to be local groups operating in relatively small geographical areas. Reveals that the issue of whether childcare should be free caused mixed but fairly evenly distributed responses, from strong agreement to strong disagreement, but the issue of external sources of funding and the problems involved caused the majority of respondents to agree that childcare services are unsustainable without external funding, a finding that shows that sustainability is not the same as self‐sufficiency. Concludes that childcare sector issues and social economy issues are the most significant.

Contributes to the social enterprises literature where there is a dearth of knowledge about the birth and death rates for social enterprises and where improved statistics would help in supporting sector‐related policies more effectively and understanding better the sector’s function and behaviour. Provides information that could be helpful for banks and other financial institutions that might be in a position to offer credit to these social enterprises.

This chapter examines the development of an Entrepreneurship Education initiative (Triple E: Employability, Enterprise and Entrepreneurship) in the Higher Education context. The initiative is further contextualised by a dynamic policy framework concerning widening access as a major priority for the Scottish Government. In addition, the initiative is based on innovation in contemporary pedagogical design and further policy drivers supporting the development of graduates with an enterprising mind-set and graduate attributes (articulated by employers) and interpreted by academics and public sector stakeholders as relevant for graduate labour market competitiveness. The chapter examines Entrepreneurship Education literature and presents a case study which examines pedagogical design and normative assumptions, participant progression, (students and staff) and the engagement of external stakeholders. The case study describes and analyses the key design principles for inclusive and accessible Entrepreneurship Education within the context of widening participation policy. A discussion on the practice of achieving inclusive and accessible Entrepreneurship Education explores intra-institution policy, drivers enablers and cultural and resource constraints. The chapter concludes with a summary of the design principles on inclusivity and accessibility in Entrepreneurship Education and discusses attempts to mitigate the challenges presented by a widening participation policy.

To study some of the difficulties involved in defining the nature of social enterprises and the environments in which they operate in order to provide a framework to show how and where social enterprises fit in the overall social economy.

The complexity of organizations involved in the spectrum of the social economy is discussed in terms of the literature to show how many social enterprises in the UK and worldwide can be categorized as small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). Discusses the ambiguity prevalent in the social economy concerning the terms and concepts of “not for profit”, “non‐profit”, social enterprise and social entrepreneur and illustrates the successes, failures and difficulties of the social enterprise sector.

The four key issues which the definitional debate needs to address, comprise: voluntary participation; independence from the state; the concept of profit (profit making, appropriateness of profit making from certain activities, profit maximization, profit distribution); and ownership and corporate governance. Illustrates the points made in the article with particular reference to three case studies involving: Edinburgh Lothian Council On Alcohol (ELCA) (company limited by guarantee with charitable status); First Scottish University Credit Union Ltd (FSUCUL) (credit union); and Forth Sector (social firm).

Sorts out some of the difficulties and complexities in the definition and classification of social enterprises.

This paper seeks to examine the discourses that influence policy and practice in social enterprises. In institutional circles, arguments are shaped by the desire to protect assets for the community, while entrepreneurial discourses favour a mixture of investment sources, surplus sharing and inclusive systems of governance. A critique is outlined that challenges policy‐makers and academics to move beyond the heated debate on “business‐like” activity through a deeper understanding of the social relations entered into (and created by) different social entrepreneurial activities.

The paper is wholly theoretical. First, contradictions are exposed through a review of practitioner and scholarly literature. Thereafter, empirically grounded studies are used to develop a theoretical model that accommodates and accounts for diverse practices.

A broader perspective, that views human behaviour as a product of, and support system for, our socio‐sexual choices, is deployed to extend understanding of social capital. By integrating this into governance theory, workplaces come to be seen as complex centres of community‐building, replete with economic and social goals. The concept of “social rationality” is elaborated as an alternative way to understand the legitimacy of social entrepreneurial activity and management practice.

The paper concludes by developing a framework and typology that theorises social enterprise as a heterogeneous business movement. Each form of social enterprise integrates socially rational thinking into its policies and practices. This suggests a different educational agenda for social entrepreneurs oriented towards the equitable distribution, and not accumulation, of social and economic capital.

The purpose of this paper is to examine two forms of power construal – self-focused and other-focused power – on effects of increasing or decreasing sex-based harassment (SBH) tendencies through feeling states triggered by imagining these different types of power. In addition, dispositional traits associated with either self- and other-focused power were tested as moderators of these paths.

An online experiment was conducted with 549 US adults (58 percent men) who were randomly assigned to imagine themselves with self-focused power, other-focused power or control. Dispositional measures were completed before priming; and feelings of sexiness, powerfulness and communalism were completed after priming. Then, participants completed either modified versions of Pryor’s (1987) Likelihood to Sexually Harass Scale or Williams et al.’s (2017) Workplace Crush Scenario.

Moderated indirect effects indicated that self-focused power increased participants’ feelings of sexiness and powerfulness, which, in turn, increased either measure of SBH. However, these indirect effects were only significant for individuals low in Dark Triad traits (Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy). Surprisingly, other-focused power priming indirectly increased SBH tendencies through communal feelings.

Moral licensing may explain the unexpected effect of other-focused power on SBH. Organizational leaders should monitor the damaging effects of both forms of power.

This is the first study to examine how both negative and positive power construals affect harassment tendencies and to document potential nefarious effects for both types of power.