Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T11:03:40.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Doing Good and Selling Goods

Hybrid Commodities in the Social Enterprise Ecosystem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Richard PfeilstetterOpen the ORCID record for Richard Pfeilstetter[Opens in a new window]
Richard Pfeilstetter*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Sevilla, C/Dña Ma de Padilla, 41004 Seville, Spain
*
rgp@us.es; http://personal.us.es/rgp
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper explores a network of organizations and their perspectives on the social enterprise commodity. Based on ethnographic research, I present the case of recycled bags sold in the city centre of Vienna (Austria) by three organizations, including a work integration social enterprise. By reviewing two different strands in the organizational studies literature that both employ biological notions to theorize (social) enterprising, I argue that opposing “hybridity” to “ecosystems” is a suitable way to assess two different research agendas in that field. While I subscribe to the ecosystem focus—seeing organizations as a function of the social environment—I make the case for the importance of research into “hybrid commodities” as a way to explore larger issues concerning social enterprise scholarship, such as mission drift, hidden agendas or organizational identity work.

Keywords

Hybrid organizationsEntrepreneurial ecosystemsSocial enterpriseCommoditiesAustriaSpain

Information

Type
Research Papers
Information
Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , June 2020, pp. 511 - 520
Copyright
Copyright © International Society for Third-Sector Research 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alvedalen, J., & Boschma, R. (2017). A critical review of entrepreneurial ecosystems research Towards a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 25(6), 887–903. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2017.1299694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing—insights from the study of social enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2014.893615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggeri, M., Testi, E., & Bellucci, M. (2017a). Enabling ecosystems for social enterprises and social innovation a capability approach perspective. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 182, 299–306. doi: 10.1080/19452829.2017.1306690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggeri, M., Testi, E., Bellucci, M., During, R., & Persson, T. (Eds.). (2017b). Social entrepreneurship in Europe: Ecosystems for innovative and inclusive societies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Billis, D. (2010). Towards a theory of hybrid organizations. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blim, M. (2005). The moral significance of petty capitalism. In Smart, A. & Smart, J. (Eds.), Petty capitalists and globalization: Flexibility, entrepreneurship, and economic development (pp. 253–270). New York, NY: SUNY.Google Scholar
Brown, R., & Mason, C. (2017). Looking inside the spiky bits A critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 11–30. doi: 10.1007/s11187-017-9865-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caritas, A. (2016). Caritas und Du. Wirkungsbericht 2015. Available at: https://www.caritas.at/aktuell/publikationen/wirkungsberichte/.Google Scholar
Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. (Eds.). (1986). Writing culture. The poetics and politics of ethnography. London: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, B. (2006). Sustainable valley entrepreneurial ecosystems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15(1), 1–14. doi: 10.1002/bse.428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornforth, C. (2014). Understanding and combating mission drift in social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal, 10(1), 3–20. doi: 10.1108/SEJ-09-2013-0036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Defourny, J. (2010). Concepts and realities of social enterprise: A European perspective. In Fayolle, A. & Matlay, H. (Eds.), Handbook of research on social entrepreneurship (pp. 57–87). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Dey, P., & Teasdale, S. (2016). The tactical mimicry of social enterprise strategies: Acting ‘as if’ in the everyday life of third sector organizations. Organization, 23(4), 485–504. doi: 10.1177/1350508415570689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Review, 16(4), 417–436. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organizations. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 34, 81–100. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2014.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (2001). Fundamentos sociales de las economías postindustriales. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
European Commission (2015). A map of social enterprises and their ecosystems in Europe. Brussels: Directorate General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.Google Scholar
Frenkel, M., & Shenhav, Y. (2006). From binarism back to hybridity: A postcolonial reading of management and organization studies. Organization Studies, 27(6), 855–876. doi: 10.1177/0170840606064086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gajparia, J. (2017). Capitalising on rapport, emotional labour and colluding with the neoliberal academy. Women’s Studies International Forum, 61, 87–92. doi: 10.1016/j.wsif.2016.10.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gidron, B. (2017). The dual hybridity of social enterprises for marginalized populations. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 8(1), 1–13. doi: 10.1080/19420676.2016.1207700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmore, S., & Kenny, K. (2015). Work-worlds colliding: Self-reflexivity, power and emotion in organizational ethnography. Human Relations, 68(1), 55–78. doi: 10.1177/0018726714531998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure. The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 381–510. doi: 10.1086/228311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazenberg, R., Bajwa-Patel, M., Roy, M. J., Mazzei, M., & Baglioni, S. (2016). A comparative overview of social enterprise ‘ecosystems’ in Scotland and England: An evolutionary perspective. International Review of Sociology, 26(2), 205–222. doi: 10.1080/03906701.2016.1181395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill O’Connor, C., & Baker, R. (2017). Working with and for social enterprises: The role of the volunteer ethnographer. Social Enterprise Journal, 13(2), 180–193. doi: 10.1108/SEJ-07-2016-0033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hustinx, L., & De Waele, E. (2015). Managing hybridity in a changing welfare mix: Everyday practices in an entrepreneurial nonprofit in Belgium. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(5), 1666–1689. doi: 10.1007/s11266-015-9625-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerlin, J. (2009). Social enterprise: A global comparison. New England: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
Kerlin, J. (2010). A comparative analysis of the global emergence of social enterprise. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 21(2), 162–179. doi: 10.1007/s11266-010-9126-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerlin, J. (2013). Defining social enterprise across different contexts: A conceptual framework based on institutional factors. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 42(1), 84–108. doi: 10.1177/0899764011433040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlewood, D., & Khan, Z. (2018). Insights from a systematic review of literature on social enterprise and networks: Where, how and what next?. Social Enterprise Journal, 14(4), 390–409. doi: 10.1108/SEJ-11-2018-068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, G. (2001). From rapport under erasure to theaters of complicit reflexivity. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(4), 519–528. doi: 10.1177/107780040100700408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Standford Social Innovation Review, Spring, 29–39.Google Scholar
Mauksch, S. (2016). Managing the dance of enchantment: An ethnography of social entrepreneurship events. Organization, 24(2), 133–153. doi: 10.1177/1350508416644511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mauksch, S., Dey, P., Rowe, M., & Teasdale, S. (2017). Ethnographies of social enterprise. Social Enterprise Journal, 13(2), 114–127. doi: 10.1108/SEJ-03-2017-0019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzei, J., & O’Brien, E. (2009). You got it, so when do you flaunt it? Building rapport, intersectionality, and the strategic deployment of gender in the field. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38(3), 358–383. doi: 10.1177/0891241608330456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mcmullen, J. S. (2018). Organizational hybrids as biological hybrids: Insights for research on the relationship between social enterprise and the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 575–590. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molina, J. L., Valenzuela-García, H., Lubbers, M. J., Escribano, P., & Lobato, M. (2018). The cowl does make the monk. Understanding the emergence of social entrepreneurship in times of downturn. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 29(4), 725–739. doi: 10.1007/s11266-017-9921-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordstrom, S. (2015). Not so innocent anymore: Making recording devices matter in qualitative interviews. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(4), 388–401. doi: 10.1177/1077800414563804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD. (2016). Building enabling ecosystems for social enterprises. In Capacity building seminar, 17th–18th February 2016, Brussels. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/employment/leed/socialoecd-eu-cbs.htm.Google Scholar
Polanyi, K. (1944 |2011|). The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Raišienė, A., & Urmanavičienė, A. (2017). Mission drift in a hybrid organization: How can social business combine its dual goals?. Ekonomski Vjesnik, 30(2), 301–310.Google Scholar
Roundy, P. (2017a). Hybrid organizations and the logics of entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(4), 1221–1237. doi: 10.1007/s11365-017-0452-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roundy, P. (2017b). Social entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Journal of Social Economics, 44(9), 1252–1267. doi: 10.1108/IJSE-02-2016-0045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, M. J., & Grant, S. (2019). The contemporary relevance of Karl Polanyi to critical social enterprise scholarship. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship. doi: 10.1080/19420676.2019.1621363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, M. J., & Hazenberg, R. (2019). An evolutionary perspective on social entrepreneurship ‘ecosystems’. In De Bruin, A. & Teasdale, S. (Eds.), A research agenda for social entrepreneurship (pp. 13–22). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. doi: 10.4337/9781788972321.00006.Google Scholar
Roy, M. J., McHugh, N., Huckfield, L., Kay, A., & Donaldson, C. (2015). “The most supportive environment in the world”? Tracing the development of an institutional ‘Ecosystem’ for social enterprise. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(3), 777–800. doi: 10.1007/s11266-014-9459-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherif, B. (2001). The ambiguity of boundaries in the fieldwork experience: Establishing rapport and negotiating insider/outsider status. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(4), 436–447. doi: 10.1177/107780040100700403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, S. (2010). Explaining the multifaceted nature of social enterprise: Impression management as (social) entrepreneurial behaviour. Voluntary Sector Review, 1(3), 271–292. doi: 10.1332/204080510X538257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teasdale, S., Lyon, F., & Baldock, R. (2013). Playing with numbers: A methodological critique of the social enterprise growth myth. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 4(2), 113–131. doi: 10.1080/19420676.2012.762800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomsen, B., Muurlink, O., & Best, T. (2018). The political ecology of university-based social entrepreneurship ecosystems. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 12(2), 199–219. doi: 10.1108/JEC-08-2017-0068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, D. R., Searing, E. A., & Brewer, C. V. (Eds.). (2017). The social enterprise Zoo: A guide for perplexed scholars, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, leaders, investors and policymakers (pp. 193–212). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar