Advertisement

Qualitative Research in Social Entrepreneurship: A Critique

  • Satyajit MajumdarEmail author
  • Usha Ganesh
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)

Abstract

Social entrepreneurship is multi-disciplinary area of scholarly enquiry. Being a new area of research, this is yet to emerge fully. Scholars have been studying cases in search of concepts to explain social entrepreneurship. Attempts have also been made to theorise the phenomenon and to develop theories thereof. Hence, it is obvious that research on social entrepreneurship in the last decades has been mostly qualitative and case study based and the scholars have been mostly focusing on developing concepts to explain functions and processes while reporting the impact. Case studies have also been used to explain similarities and differences between social and commercial entrepreneurship. Qualitative research provides strength to unfold the concepts and allows enormous possibilities to open up new dimensions. In this chapter, critique on case study method of qualitative research provided us the way to present different phenomenon to theorise which eventually would provide sound basis to construct theory on social entrepreneurship.

Keywords

Case study Case study method Social entrepreneurship Themes in social entrepreneurship research Theory building 

References

  1. Carlile, P., & Christensen, C. (2004). The cycles of theory building in management research.Google Scholar
  2. Choi, N., & Majumdar, S. (2013). Social entrepreneurship as an essentially contested concept: Opening a new avenue for systematic future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(3), 363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Corley, K., & Gioia, D. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dees, G., & Anderson, B. (2006). Framing a theory of social entrepreneurship: Building on two schools of practice and thought. Research on social entrepreneurship: Understanding and contributing to an emerging field.Google Scholar
  5. Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2014). Social co-operatives: When social enterprises meet the co-operative tradition. Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, 2(2), 11–33.Google Scholar
  6. Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2017). Mapping social enterprise models: Some evidence from the “ICSEM” project. Social Enterprise Journal, 13(4), 318–328.Google Scholar
  7. Dubin, R. (1976). Theory building in applied areas. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 17–39). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  8. Eisenhardt, K., & Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Review, 50(1), 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Nursing Research, 17(4), 364.Google Scholar
  10. Groat, L., & Wang, D. (2002). Architectural research methods. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  11. Gioia, D., & Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hadad, S. (2017). Main research areas and methods in social entrepreneurship. De Gruyter Open, 11(1), 893–903 (Online on August 26, 2017).  https://doi.org/10.1515/picbe-2017-0095).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoffman, A., John, B., Krista, K., & Haigh, N. (2012). Hybrid organizations as agents of positive social change: Bridging the for-profit & non-profit divide. In K. Golden-Biddle & J. Dutton (Eds.), Using a positive lens to explore social change and organizations: Building a theoretical and research foundation (pp. 131–153). New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
  14. Johansson, R. (2003). Case study methodology. International Conference “Methodologies in Housing Research” organised by the Royal Institute of Technology in cooperation with the International Association of People-Environment Studies, Stockholm, September 22–24, 2003.Google Scholar
  15. Kerlin, J. A. (2006). Social enterprises in the United States and Europe: Understanding and learning from the differences. International Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organizations, 17, 247–263.Google Scholar
  16. Lynham, S. A. (2002). The general method of theory building research in applied disciplines. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4, 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lynham, S. (2009). Theory building in the human resource development profession. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11(2). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marsick, V. J. (1990). Altering the paradigm for theory building and research in human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 1(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
  21. Nicholls, A. (2006). Playing the field: A new approach to the meaning of social entrepreneurship. Social Enterprise Journal, 2.Google Scholar
  22. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Peattie, K., & Morley, A. (2008). Eight paradoxes of the social enterprise research agenda. Social Enterprise Journal, 4(2), 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Reynolds, P. D. (1971). A primer in theory construction. Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1999). Global civil society: Dimensions of the non-profit sector. The John Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies: Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
  26. Sengupta, S., & Sahay, A. (2018). Social enterprises in the Indian context: Conceptualizing through qualitative lens. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research.Google Scholar
  27. Shepherd, D. A., & Suddaby, R. (2016). Theory building: A review and integration. Journal of Management, 43(1), 59–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith, W. K., Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly.Google Scholar
  29. Stake. (2003). Case studies. Strategies of qualitative inquiry. pp. 134–164.Google Scholar
  30. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Steyaert, C., & Dey, P. (2010). Nine verbs to keep the social entrepreneurship research agenda ‘dangerous’. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(2), 231–254.Google Scholar
  33. Steyaert, C., & Hjorth, D. (2006). Introduction: What is social in social entrepreneurship?. Entrepreneurship as social change: A third new movements in entrepreneurship. Book pp. 1–18. Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Tiwari, P., Bhat, A. K., & Tikoria, J. (2017). An empirical analysis of the factors affecting social entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research. Google Scholar
  35. Van de Ven, A., & Poole, M. S. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 562–578.Google Scholar
  36. Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education: Yin, Merriam and Stake. Qualitative Report, 20(2). Teaching and learning article 1.Google Scholar
  37. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Yin, R. K. (2002). Applications of case study research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Management and Labour Studies, Centre for Social EntrepreneurshipTata Institute of Social SciencesMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations