The aim of this investigation is to explore the extent to which individuals’ education and professional background influences the launching of a new social ventures (SV) in Portugal. To attain this objective, empirical data were collected through an online survey to social entrepreneurs who have already launched a SV. The sample consists of individuals who were responsible for the creation of a Portuguese NGO or a SV available on the Portuguese Social Stock Exchange. For data analysis, descriptive and inferential statistics (chi-square goodness-of-fit test) were used, as well as principal components analysis. Our investigation reveals that a higher educational level stimulates the emergence of new SV. Individuals’ professional background (such as prior occupational status, professional satisfaction and entrepreneurial context) also has a positive impact on the decision-making. We also detect that individuals’ past entrepreneurial experiences shape (in an indirect way) how individuals accept the risks of launching a SV.
Social entrepreneurship is an emerging concept that has been progressively applied to the resolution of social issues (Dees, 2001; Mair, 2010; Mair & Martí, 2006; Okpara & Halkias, 2011). This new concept applies an entrepreneurial orientation to the social area and blends two objectives which had so far been considered as unbundled-social and economic value creation. As stated by Bacq and Janssen (2011, p. 376) social entrepreneurship refers to “the process of identifying, evaluating and exploiting opportunities aiming at social value creation by means of commercial, market-based activities and of the use of a wide range of resources”. According to Friedman and Desivilya (2010, p. 495), social entrepreneurship is seen as “a range of practices and discourses involving the creation of new and innovative organizations or enterprises to meet human needs and improve services”.
In general, the ultimate goal of social organizations is to create social value in a meaningful and prominent way (Dees, 1998; Peredo & McLean, 2006; Sharir & Lerner, 2006; Zahra, Newey, & Li, 2014), by keeping its social mission explicit and central (Mair & Martí, 2006). This approach attempts to reduce social gaps through combinations of social value creation with economic sustainability (Costanzo, Vurro, Foster, Servato, & Perrini, 2014) maximizing its ability to generate social value.
Social organizations differ from traditional not-for-profit organizations due to its entrepreneurial and business nature (Dees, 1998; Nicholls & Cho, 2008; Weerawardena & Mort, 2012), while its social dimension distinguishes them from other organizational forms, such as traditional for-profit, private companies (Dacin, Dacin, & Matear, 2010).
Social entrepreneurship seeks to create social and economic value in a simultaneous and mutually reinforcing manner. The creation of economic value is seen as a means for creating social value by fostering organizational sustainability and enabling the social venture to continue pursuing its mission. The existence of the two objectives of social and economic value creation makes social entrepreneurship an intrinsically hybrid field. This is because it is developed at the intersection of different activity areas, such as public sector, civil society and business markets (Gras & Mendoza-Abarca, 2014; Jäger & Schröer, 2014; Nicolopoulou, 2014; Zahra et al., 2014). This condition introduces considerable challenges at the strategic, tactical and operational levels of the organization.
This new view of solving complex and persistent social problems challenges entrepreneurs to surpass increased difficulties (Costanzo et al., 2014; Gordon, 2014; Lan, Zhu, Ness, Xing, & Schneider, 2014; Obschonka, Silbereisen, & Schmitt-Rodermund, 2010). The literature has pointed out that social entrepreneurs are the result of their context, which integrates a vast number of factors that can affect their propensity to invest in social projects (Ármannsdóttir, 2011; London & Morfopoulos, 2010; Obschonka, Silbereisen, & Schmitt-Rodermund, 2012; Shumate, Atouba, Cooper, & Pilny, 2014). Given the huge potential of social entrepreneurship for social value creation, it is critical to understand the factors that explain why some individuals are social entrepreneurs while others are not. In these circumstances, some researchers have attempted to assess whether education (Bacq, Hartog, Hoogendoorn, & Lepoutre, 2011; Bosma & Levie, 2010; GEM, 2009; Harding & Cowling, 2006; Hoogendoorn, Zwan, & Thurik, 2011; Lan et al., 2014; Lehner, 2011; Van Ryzin, Bergrud, & DiPadova-Stocks, 2007; Van Ryzin, Grossman, DiPadova-Stocks, & Bergrud, 2009) and professional background (Ármannsdóttir, 2011; Baral, Simons, & Lane, 2012; Germak & Robinson, 2013; Leahy & Villeneuve-Smith, 2009; Lee & Battilana, 2013; Van Ryzin et al., 2009) foster social entrepreneurial behaviour and encourage individuals to establish a new social venture. Other academic works, in turn, have discussed the impact of the perceived feasibility of the social venture on the decision of the social entrepreneur (Mair & Noboa, 2006). Despite the increasing academic interest on the topic over recent years, more empirical research is needed, specifically in the Portuguese context. Further, to the best of our knowledge, there is a lack of empirical evidence about the role of professional background on how social entrepreneurs manage the perceived risks in the process of setting up a social venture.
The present study attempts to fill these gaps and adds to the current body of knowledge on the topic. Based on the Portuguese context, the purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which an education and professional background help to explain why some individuals are social entrepreneurs and others are not. We also aim to better understand how these factors could affect individuals’ ability to develop a social project, which implies the acceptance of numerous risks. To achieve these purposes, the pertinent literature is reviewed, stressing the role that education and a professional background play in the decision to launch a new social project. We then provide a brief overview of the social sector in Portugal and describe the methods that will be used in our empirical study. The results obtained are presented and discussed in the following sections. The paper concludes with the main findings, some research limitations and suggestions for future research.
2Pertinent literature2.1Educational levelEducation is believed to be an encouraging element of entrepreneurial behaviour. Several studies, based on secondary data for different countries, suggest that the level of education increases the probability of an individual being involved in a social entrepreneurship initiative (Bosma & Levie, 2010; GEM, 2009; Harding & Cowling, 2006; Hoogendoorn et al., 2011; Lehner, 2011; Van Ryzin et al., 2009). The empirical evidence available suggests that social entrepreneurs usually have a higher educational level than that of economic entrepreneurs (Bacq et al., 2011; GEM, 2009; Hoogendoorn et al., 2011; Van Ryzin et al., 2007).
Evaluating the influence of the educational level on entrepreneurial propensity, Estrin, Mickiewicz, and Stephan (2011) identify a positive contribution to both types of entrepreneurship, although the influence is more expressive in social entrepreneurship than in commercial entrepreneurship. In 2009, a special Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) report on social entrepreneurship note that the level of education has a positive influence in all countries under review (forty-seven), even though the ‘education effect’ is particularly evident in countries with a low level of economic development (where economic and social differences between individuals are more obvious). According to this report, the individuals who have a higher educational level may feel a more urgent need to cope with the existent social scourges (GEM, 2009). In Portugal, the results of a case study research carried out under the European project “Université coopérative européenne” suggest that most social entrepreneurs have a higher education degree (Ferreira, 2005). Similarly, the general early-stage entrepreneurial activity in Portugal increases when individuals’ educational level is higher (GEM Portugal, 2013).
The relevance of education for a social entrepreneurship development can be justified by a greater sensitivity to social issues, which, according to the literature, will be more critical for people with greater qualifications (Estrin et al., 2011; GEM, 2009). Another explanation is presented by GEM (2009) that advocates that the identification of opportunities and the development of social projects are easier for well-educated people. This institution further argues that entrepreneurs’ financial security (presumably greater in individuals with a higher education) will allow individuals to explore other elements of a not exclusively material nature.
In a different way, Baral et al. (2012) argue that a new group of young social entrepreneurs is arising among students who have completed their higher education and have been ‘exposed’ to social entrepreneurship in their universities. Co and Cooper (2014) contend that general entrepreneurship education could increase the awareness, knowledge and skills required to start a new venture, developing the confidence of individuals in their own competencies, and encouraging their entrepreneurial intent. Co and Cooper's (2014) research shows that education on social entrepreneurship (through a module at a university) has very little change in students’ entrepreneurial intentions. However, the authors’ research find that education in social entrepreneurship provide more confidence and self-efficacy to those individuals who already have some intentions to be social entrepreneurs and, therefore, increase the probability of launching a new project.
Furthermore, Lan et al. (2014, p. 395) highlight that social entrepreneurship “is a challenging and difficult process and requires the social entrepreneurs to be trained and developed to be more capable in terms of strategic and innovative thinking, to apply consistency and be persistent with their goals and plans, flexible to deal with changes and lead the transformation with competence”. Differently, Lee and Battilana (2013) suggest that the current education system may inhibit the combination of different logics and the constitution of hybrid organizations.
Regarding the field where social entrepreneurs developed their studies, Lehner (2011) found, in an Austrian case, that most social entrepreneurs have a degree in business studies; this was followed by individuals who come from technical fields and social sciences. Nga and Shamuganathan (2010), in turn, argue that business and management education can facilitate the development of critical personality traits, which are conducive to social entrepreneurship. In Portugal, the empirical findings indicate that there are social entrepreneurs from a plurality of scientific areas (Ferreira, 2005).
In sum, the literature review indicates a positive influence of the educational level on the social entrepreneurial activity, either by the increased sensitive to social causes or by the development of critical competences in different areas of management. In Portugal, the scarce evidence also suggests that social entrepreneurs are highly educated individuals. However, this pattern needs to be confirmed with more extensive empirical findings through both qualitative and quantitative studies. Moreover, it is crucial to understand how educational level shapes and encourages the process of social venture formation in order to promote social entrepreneurial behaviour.
2.2Professional backgroundAn individual's professional background has been recognized as an important factor for the development of a social entrepreneurial activity. According to Van Ryzin et al. (2009), professional experience in management increases the likelihood of an individual becoming a social entrepreneur. This is seen as a catalyst for the success of social entrepreneurship initiatives (Sharir & Lerner, 2006).
An investigation held in 2011 in Iceland suggests that social entrepreneurs usually develop their activities in areas that are directly linked to their previous job (Ármannsdóttir, 2011). According to Ármannsdóttir, the evidence is justified by the familiarity that professional experience provides to the initiative. In a similar manner, Ferreira (2005) reveals, for the Portuguese case, that social entrepreneurs are often engaged in projects with which they have shared some sort of connection, either in regard to the type of organization or the activity area. Similarly, Shumate et al. (2014) confirmed the relevance of previous professional experiences and found that social entrepreneurs are more likely to launch a social venture in areas that allow them to lead their work on a social issue.
Estrin et al. (2011) and Estrin, Mickiewicz, and Stephan (2013) find that individuals who are already social entrepreneurs are more likely to create a new social initiative. This research also indicates that individuals who are already economic entrepreneurs are less likely to start (simultaneously) a social entrepreneurial venture. In reverse, the authors identify a positive relationship between the creation of social organizations and future involvement in economic entrepreneurships. Against these results, the authors conclude that social entrepreneurship can be seen as a ‘path’ to the practice of economic entrepreneurship. These results are justified by two distinct factors: (i) some individuals may discover that their sustainability and economic autonomy can only be achieved through economic entrepreneurship initiatives; and (ii) people less prone to economic entrepreneurships develop their entrepreneurial skills and confidence in the context of social organizations, and later, they will perceive that they are qualified enough to start an economic venture.
Regarding the activity where social entrepreneurs worked previously, Germak and Robinson (2013) state that social entrepreneurs could arise from two different professional contexts. These contexts affect the way a social organization is conceived. The contexts include: (i) individuals coming from the traditional business sector, with no previous experience in social entrepreneurship, who could have previously launched other commercial ventures and who could, or could not, have experience in managing these initiatives; and (ii) individuals coming from the public or social sectors, who could also have no experience in the field of social entrepreneurship.
Leahy and Villeneuve-Smith (2009), in a United Kingdom case, find that about half of the social entrepreneurs were already employed in the social sector, while the remaining ones previously worked for the business or public sectors. Johnson (2003) suggests that individuals with a long working history in the social sector may be reluctant in applying the language of the private sector, and therefore, could face some barriers in accepting social entrepreneurial practices.
Previous exposure to the business sector is also confirmed by Lee and Battilana (2013), who find that both parental work experiences, professional education and personal work experiences are relevant for the creation of hybrid organizations, such as social ventures. Moreover, Lan et al.’s (2014) empirical research shows that social entrepreneurs have special skills related to their professional experience, such as the capacity of network building, being vigilant to business opportunities and being active to learn new things and share their knowledge with others.
Regarding the occupational situation, GEM (2009) indicates that the most common occupational status among social entrepreneurs is self-employment; this is followed by part-time employees, full-time employees, students, and finally, people who are not working or who are in some other occupational situation. The same report reveals that in innovation-driven or efficiency-driven economies, the practice of social entrepreneurship is more often among part-time employees or students. Harding and Cowling (2006), in a different way, indicate that full-time employed individuals are the most likely people to be engaged in social initiatives.
Bacq et al. (2011), studying the Belgium and the Netherlands cases, recognize that most social entrepreneurs have paid employment, although the authors identify that the percentage of individuals who are labour market inactive is greater in social entrepreneurship than in economic entrepreneurship. Additionally, Bacq et al. (2011, p. 21) evidence that most social entrepreneurs consider “their social activity as an activity outside their daily job”. To that extent, the authors conclude that the transition to full-time self-employment status is less common in social entrepreneurs than in economic entrepreneurs. Bacq et al. (2011, p. 21) provide two possible justifications for this situation: (i) “lack prospects in terms of opportunities and income generating capacity or specific challenges regarding resource mobilization”; and (ii) “the activity may (…) be considered as a hobby, a volunteer activity, or an activity on the side which contrasts the image of the ‘possessed’ and ‘fully committed’ social entrepreneurs”. On the contrary, Estrin et al. (2011) do not find a significant association between individuals’ occupational situation and the creation of new social initiatives.
Job satisfaction has also been mentioned as a driver of social entrepreneurship. London and Morfopoulos (2010) suggest that individuals with a high need for achievement and whose professional work does not provide satisfaction, may attempt to compensate their frustrations on the basis of volunteerism and involvement in social initiatives. Similarly, the entrepreneurship literature's empirical evidence shows that dissatisfaction with past experiences increases the likelihood of individuals being involved in the creation of their own ventures (Smith-Hunter, Kapp, & Jonkers, 2003).
In addition to professional experience, personal factors seem to shape the individuals’ intentions to launch a social venture. The research suggests that a person's vocational development towards entrepreneurship “may start early in life given that vocational development is considered to begin in childhood” (Obschonka et al., 2012, p. 179). In fact, some authors have identified the importance of participating during their youth in organizations and the services of well-being, as well as religious formation and participation in activities organized by religious institutions (London & Morfopoulos, 2010).
The entrepreneurial skills previously developed seem to also influence the decision to become an entrepreneur. The empirical evidence recognizes that skills developed during adolescence (such as leadership or creative initiatives), and the stimulus that these competencies provide, will predict the ability to generate business ideas in adulthood (Obschonka et al., 2010). Additionally, social entrepreneurs’ motivations often arise as a way to follow the experience of their parents or older siblings (London & Morfopoulos, 2010).
In for profit entrepreneurship, a significant number of studies have identified a positive, although sometimes small, effect of the exposure to parental entrepreneurship on an offspring's entrepreneurial intentions (Laspita, Breugst, Heblich, & Patzelt, 2012; Schmitt-Rodermund, 2004). Chlosta, Patzelt, Klein, and Dormann (2012), based on social learning theory, explore the influence of parental role models on the decision to become self-employed. The authors argue that the growth and exposure in families with an entrepreneurial heritage offers children the opportunity to learn from others who are role models for them. These experiences influence their attitudes, values and lifestyle. Through the observation of their parents’ actions, individuals learn and transform the information retained in internal codes that configure a mental model and influence their decision-making processes (including occupational choice).
Laspita et al. (2012) note that the influence of parents differs according to children’ age. A more pronounced impact occurs during the adolescence cycle, than during the childhood cycle. Bosma, Hessels, Schutjens, Praag, and Verheul (2012) also confirm the positive effect of the presence of entrepreneurial role models for entrepreneurs’ career choice, mainly for individuals with higher levels of education, due to their higher absorptive capacity and their capacity to interpret and apply (external) knowledge. These authors, based on both social learning and role identification theory, argue that “the dominant function of a role model is ‘learning by example’, although ‘learning by support’, ‘increasing entrepreneurial self-efficacy’ and ‘inspiration/motivation’ are also important (perceived) functions of role models” (Bosma et al., 2012, p. 422). Bosma et al. (2012) indicate that role models could compensate for a lack of entrepreneurial experience; this is particularly important in individuals who have no previous background.
Social entrepreneurial orientation can also be explained by the beliefs and social norms that prevail in the circles closer to the individuals (e.g. friends and family). According to Paço, Ferreira, Raposo, Rodrigues, and Dinis (2011), these subjective social norms are, in part, determined by the opinion of those people who influence individuals’ entrepreneurial behaviour. The main reasons cited by the literature include following the rules of their peers, accepting invitations from friends, joining an initiative in which their friends are involved, or following the example of people who have achieved a positive social impact (Ármannsdóttir, 2011; London & Morfopoulos, 2010).
In addition to personal contacts, social entrepreneurs can follow behaviour models performed by other respected and admired businesspersons, whose success has inspired other social entrepreneurs (London & Morfopoulos, 2010). As suggested by Griskevicius, Cantú, and Vugt (2012), and in accordance with the contingent behaviour theory, individuals tend to imitate those who are perceived as prestigious or successful. According to these authors, individuals will be more prone to be social entrepreneurs when they perceive that the same is done by other people or by individuals with significant leadership characteristics. Estrin et al. (2011) confirm the positive effect of an entrepreneur's role on the creation of a social venture, since it is more likely to occur when an individual has already made connections with someone who is an entrepreneur. In Portugal, a qualitative research also confirms the relevance of role models to the involvement in social entrepreneurship (Braga, Proença, & Ferreira, 2014).
The scientific community has further tried to analyse the influence of the national ‘entrepreneurial spirit’ or ‘entrepreneurial culture’ on the social entrepreneurship practice. The conclusions obtained are not consensual. Some researchers argue that the level of entrepreneurship in a society is not directly related with the level of social entrepreneurship (Hoogendoorn & Hartog, 2011). Another investigation (Estrin et al., 2013) illustrates that in countries with a high economic entrepreneurship level, individuals are less likely to be social entrepreneurs. The authors, on the basis of the institutional void theory, maintain that an intense entrepreneurial activity reduces the opportunities available for social entrepreneurs.
Conversely, other researchers claim that societies that are traditionally more entrepreneurial are more prone to engage in social entrepreneurship and that these two entrepreneurship approaches (i.e. economic and social) are mutually reinforcing (Estrin et al., 2011). The GEM report (2009) contends that entrepreneurial economies usually provide a more favourable environment for the development of social entrepreneurial initiatives.
To sum up, academic community has discussed and confirmed the relevance of professional background on social entrepreneurial behaviour. Despite the work that has been developed during the last years, the existing evidence on social entrepreneurship is still scarce. More research is still needed in order to build a more comprehensive knowledge about social entrepreneurship. In the Portuguese case, in particular, further insights are imperative.
3Social sector in PortugalIn Portugal, in accordance with the European tradition, social entrepreneurship has been mainly developed under the domain of the social and solidarity economy (Velden, Alvarez, Sá, Meira, & Ramos, 2014). The social sector in Portugal has its roots far back in the past, as can be seen, for instance, in the activities developed by the Mercies (Misericordias) since the 15th century or in the movements of workers at the beginning of the 19th century, which inspired the emergence of many co-operatives and mutual organizations that still exist today (Ferreira, 2005; Namorado, 2013). Currently, the social sector is a very diversified and heterogeneous field (Carvalho, 2010; INE & CASES, 2013). The sector comprises a wide range of organizations, with different legal forms and status, such as co-operatives, mutual societies, misericórdias (mercies), foundations, and other entities complying with the guiding principles of the social economy, as laid out in the Portuguese law (Meira, 2014).
The satellite account of the social economy, published in 2013 under a protocol of cooperation established between the Portuguese National Institute for Statistics (INE) and the António Sérgio Cooperative for Social Economy (CASES), estimates that in 2010 the social sector comprised approximately 55,000 organizations, wherein associations and other social economy organizations represent about 94% of the total. The sector has a high economic relevance, since it represents about 2.8% of the Portuguese GDP and 5.5% of the paid employment (INE & CASES, 2013).
An exemplary case of the vitality of the social sector in Portugal is the Portuguese Social Stock Exchange (PSSE). It was created in 2009 as the first social stock exchange at European level and the second worldwide. Based on the environment of a conventional stock exchange, it aims to raise funds for promising new social ventures, through the dissemination of projects to potential individuals or entities interested in its financial support (called social investors, even though their role is similar to a donor). These projects which are conceived to cope with some local social problems have already started its activity but they need additional financing to leverage its scale. The Portuguese Social Stock Exchange has a specialized technical team responsible for selecting the projects worth of being listed on the platform, according to its objectives, innovation level, scalability and replicability, expected social impact and technical and financial viability. The technical team also demands minimum accountability and governance requirements to the projects listed, in order to increase its transparency to the public and the investors.
The PSSE currently has 26 projects, eight of which have gathered all of the necessary funding. It also has two thematic investment funds, one in the area of education and the other in the area of social entrepreneurship.
4MethodsSocial entrepreneurship is a promising path to create social value in an enduring and sustainable way. A literature gap still exists on the factors which encourage or deter an individual to be a social entrepreneur. The primary purpose of this research is to explore the extent to which an education and professional background influence the creation of social ventures in Portugal. We also intent to ascertain how education and professional experience shape the social entrepreneurial behaviour. Based on these elements, our goal is to better understand why some individuals are more likely to be social entrepreneurs than others.
The quantitative approach adopted was based on structured questionnaire that was developed to collect data about the characteristics of social entrepreneurs (e.g. gender, age, position held in the social organization, entrepreneurs’ education, professional background, the perceptions individuals have about the viability of the initiative). A questionnaire was design including questions derived from the pertinent literature in order to collect primary data about the perceptions of the social entrepreneurs. Past professional experiences were assessed through dichotomous questions. The questions regarding the perception of the initiative were measured on a five-point Likert type scale (1=very low importance; 5=very high importance). Following a pilot test among experienced researchers, a final questionnaire was developed and sent by email, to the persons responsible for the creation of the social ventures. As above-mentioned, in Portugal the social sector comprises a high number of organizations, most of which are small sized non-profit associations (Carvalho, 2010; INE & CASES, 2013). Further, taking into account its entrepreneurial level, we observe that not all the sub-segments of the social economy fit into social entrepreneurship vision (Namorado, 2006). Therefore, in order to ensure the focus of the study, we define our sample on the basis of the branch(es) of the social and solidarity economy that in our own judgement seems to be closest to the spirit of social entrepreneurship and selected the organizations endowed with the status of non-governmental organizations for development and cooperation (NGOs), which also benefit from its recognition as public utility organizations (available at the Portuguese Institute for Development Assistance [IPAD]). Additionally, due to its innovative character, we included in our sample the projects listed on the Portuguese Social Stock Exchange (available at www.bvs.org.pt). In order to confine the factors that lead civil society to develop new social ventures, we excluded from the sample organizations with religious, political or partisan connections or held by other organizations of corporate character. We also only considered organizations whose individuals responsible for its creation are available at the moment of the study. This selection was based on information collected in institutional web sites, blogs, other available Internet sources and a telephone call. This screening process resulted in a sample consisting of 99 NGOs and 29 projects listed on the PSSE. The sample is random as previous procedures of randomness (two stage sampling) were adopted during the process of collecting the data.
The data were collected between September 19, 2012 and January 2, 2013. In total, 128 questionnaires were sent and 68 responses were obtained; 45 responses were provided by individuals who were involved in the decision to create the social organization. The response rate was 82.8% in the projects listed on the Portuguese social stock exchange and 44.4% in the existing NGO. The majority of respondents (62.2%) were woman. Respondents were mostly aged between 35 and 54 years old (40.0%) or between 18 and 34 years (26.7%).
For the statistical analysis, given the exploratory nature of our research, descriptive analysis techniques, such as frequencies distribution and the spearman correlation coefficient, and the chi-squared goodness-of-fit test were used. We also proceeded to the data structure reduction, through a factor analysis, by using an orthogonal rotation (varimax) and by following the rule of Kaiser (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998; Field, 2005). In order to summarize the information gathered, and have a comprehensive interpretation of the data, we produced an index for each of the principal components obtained, based on the weighted average of the variables loadings in the components (DiStefano, Zhu, & Mîndrilă, 2009; Field, 2005; Maroco, 2007).
5Results5.1EducationThe majority of respondents (93.3%) has a higher education, while the remaining has secondary studies (Table 1). The chi-squared adjustment test has registered a statistical significance (p<0.000, α=0.05), which means that the prevalence of higher education on the creation of social entrepreneurship initiatives is very significant; it also has a positive influence on individuals’ propensity to become a social entrepreneur.
Education.
| Characteristics | N (45) | % |
|---|---|---|
| Educational level | ||
| Primary | 0 | 0.0% |
| Secondary | 3 | 6.7% |
| Higher | 42 | 93.3% |
| Area of study | ||
| Health sciences | 6 | 13.3% |
| Mathematical sciences | 0 | 0.0% |
| Social sciences | 4 | 8.9% |
| Economic sciences | 9 | 20.0% |
| Engineering | 9 | 20.0% |
| Arts | 4 | 8.9% |
| Humanities | 11 | 24.4% |
| Teaching | 1 | 2.2% |
| Others | 1 | 2.2% |
With regard to the area where individuals have developed their studies, the most frequent fields are humanities (24.4%), economics (20%), engineering (20%) and health sciences (13.3%). Reversely, the less predominant areas are teaching (2.2%), social sciences (8.9%), and arts (8.9%); no respondent selected mathematical sciences. The chi-squared test shows statistical significance (p<0.014, α=0.05), indicating that the education developed in some academic areas (e.g. humanities, economics, engineering and health sciences) has a higher relevance for the development of social entrepreneurial behaviour than that of other areas.
5.2Professional backgroundWith regard to past professional experiences, we observe that most respondents (77.8%) were employed when they got involved in the social venture; only a small percentage (4.4%) of respondents were retired (Table 2). From those individuals who were employed (35 cases), almost half (48.6%) has been working in the business sector; only a small portion (14.3%) has been working in the non-profit sector.
Past professional background.
| Characteristics | N (45) | % |
|---|---|---|
| Previsous occupactional status | ||
| Retired | 2 | 4.4% |
| Labour market inactive | 8 | 17.8% |
| Employed | 35 | 77.8% |
| Working sector for individuals who were employeda | ||
| Business sector | 17 | 48.6% |
| Public sector | 13 | 37.1% |
| Non-profit sector | 5 | 14.3% |
| Individuals who were professionally satisfied | 35 | 77.8% |
| Individuals who had created an organization | 14 | 31.1% |
| Individuals whose parents had created an organization | 9 | 20.0% |
| Individuals whose friends or family members had created an organization | 24 | 53.3% |
| Individuals who had experience in organizations management | 28 | 62.2% |
We observe that the occupational status and the sector of the activity affect the way individuals collaborated with the social organizations. Firstly, individuals who were employed or retired usually acted as volunteers (51.4% and 100%, respectively), whilst individuals who were not active or who worked in the social sector usually acted as paid employees (62.5% and 100%, respectively). Secondly, individuals who were employed or retired tended to act as a chairman, in most cases, while individuals who were not labour active tended to work in technical functions (e.g. finance, logistics). According, the chi-squared tests show statistical significance (p<0.000, α=0.05; p<0.004, α=0.05); hence, the entrepreneurs’ prior occupational status and sector of activity are relevant for the inducement of social initiatives.
We also observe that a large majority of the respondents (77.8%) were professionally satisfied when they got involved with the social initiative. Hence, previous career satisfaction appears to be relevant in the way individuals work in the organization. In fact, individuals who were satisfied usually work as volunteers (60%), while the reverse is found in professionally dissatisfied individuals (80% of them are paid employees).
Analysing individuals’ entrepreneurial background, we find that most of the respondents had never created any organization before (68.9%). Moreover, most of the respondents’ parents had never created an organization before (80.0%). That being said, the entrepreneurial activity was slightly more frequent among their friends or family (53.3%). The former is especially noticeable between women (82.1%) or individuals who were not labour active (just 12.5% of them had created other organizations before).
Despite the unexpected results, we observe that the previous creation of other organizations by individuals is more common when they have a positive entrepreneurial heritage (especially due to their parents past experiences). Indeed, we find a positive and statistically significant spearman correlation coefficient among the variables ‘creation of organizations by individuals’ parents’ and ‘previous creation of an organization by individuals’ (r=0.384, α=0.01). When correlating both variables, we detected that most of the respondents followed their parents’ entrepreneurial experience, since the majority of individuals whose parents had created an organization had also launched themselves an organization (66.7%); the reverse is also found (no creation of other organizations) when their parents didn’t have these entrepreneurial activity (77.8%). Moreover, we observe that this parental entrepreneurial experience is more frequent among younger respondents (33.3% in individuals who are under 34 years old and less than 17% in the other respondents).
Despite the low entrepreneurial context, we find that more than half of the individuals (62.2%) had experience in the management of organizations. This result is quite evident among men (82.4%) and individuals with a personal or familiar experience in the management of organizations. Based on these results, past experience in management prevails when creating a social organization. The entrepreneurial background appears to have a low impact on the launch of a new social venture, although individuals who have an entrepreneurial heritage are more prone to have a similar experience.
Taking into account the results, we decided to analyse how individuals’ entrepreneurial environment could facilitate (or not facilitate) the launch of a new social venture, particularly if we consider the prior relevance attached by social entrepreneurs to external constraints and the risks associated with the new investment in the entrepreneurial decision-making process. For that purpose, a group of questions was included in the questionnaire related to the multidimensional construct of “perception of the feasibility of the social initiative”, held at the moment of enrolling in a new social venture.
By following the methodological procedures noted earlier, we obtained two principal components (Table 3). The first component was called the favourability of the external context; it aggregated the following variables: ‘existence of a favourable tax regime’; ‘existence of a favourable legal system’; ‘facility of obtaining information to start the social venture’; ‘existence of support and advice’; and ‘facility and simplicity of administrative procedures’. The second component includes the variables: ‘ability of viewing risks as opportunities’, ‘ability of identifying a social necessity’ and ‘to have competence and experience needed to start the project;’ this variable was termed perception of personal capabilities. The two components explained 64.7% of the total variability of the data and had good internal reliability, since the Cronbach's Alpha was 0.91 and 0.79, respectively for Component 1 and Component 2. The main results obtained are summarized in Table 3.
The perception of viability of the social organization-factor analysis.
| Component | Factor Analysis | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor loading ta | Average | Standard deviation | 25 Perc. | 50 Perc. | 75 Perc. | Eigenvalues | % Var. | Cumul. % | |
| Component 1: The relevance of the external context favourability | 2.6 | 1.11 | 1.5 | 2.6 | 3.2 | 4.0 | 37.7 | 37.7 | |
| Existence of a favourable tax system | 0.895 | 2.6 | 1.4 | ||||||
| Existence of a favourable legal system | 0.893 | 2.6 | 1.4 | ||||||
| Information available to start the project | 0.862 | 2.6 | 1.2 | ||||||
| Existence of support and advice | 0.808 | 2.7 | 1.2 | ||||||
| Administrative procedures for launch the project | 0.761 | 2.5 | 1.3 | ||||||
| Component 2: Perceptions about personal skills | 3.8 | 0.95 | 2.5 | 27.0 | 64.7 | ||||
| To have the ability to view risks as opportunities | 0.856 | 3.6 | 1.2 | ||||||
| To be able to identify a social necessity | 0.829 | 3.8 | 1.1 | ||||||
| To have the required competences and experience to start the project | 0.736 | 4.0 | 1.0 | ||||||
Extraction method: principal component analysis; Rotation method: varimax, with Kaiser normalization; KMO measure=0.756; Bartlett's sphericity test: p=0.000.
We observe that the perception individuals have about the ownership of personal skills is qualified by respondents as more important to the venture launch (average of 3.8, in a graphic scale of 5 points) than the existence of a favourable external context (average of 2.6). Analysing the importance that such components have in the respondents to launch a new social venture, we find that individuals, or their parents who have already created other organizations, and individuals that have previous experience in management, attach less importance to the favourability of the external context than otherwise (Table 4). On the other hand, we also detect that individuals with an entrepreneurial heritage are more prone to value the personal competences needed for launching and developing the new venture than the other individuals. Thus, we conclude that individuals’ entrepreneurial or business experience has a role to play on the perception of the feasibility of the venture, as they attach greater relevance to the possession of personal capabilities, as opposed to the existence of a favourable external context.
The relevance attached to the perception of viability of the organization according to individuals’ entrepreneurial experiences.
| Past entrepreneurial experiences | Relevance attached to the favorability of the external context (mean) | Relevance attached to the perception of personal capabilities (mean) |
|---|---|---|
| Previous creation of other organizations | ||
| Yes | 2.20 | 3.74 |
| No | 2.80 | 3.84 |
| Individuals’ parents had created an organization | ||
| Yes | 1.99 | 3.65 |
| No | 2.77 | 3.85 |
| Individuals’ friends and family had created an organization | ||
| Yes | 2.51 | 3.85 |
| No | 2.74 | 3.77 |
| Previous experience in organizations management | ||
| Yes | 2.38 | 4.06 |
| No | 3.01 | 3.40 |
In this section, we discuss the results obtained in this investigation to better understand the role played by education and professional background on the propensity to launch a new social project. The results show that social entrepreneurs have certain features in common. Firstly, social entrepreneurs have a high education, in particular, in areas such as economic sciences, engineering, humanities and health sciences. The positive effect of education found in our research confirms other empirical studies, including that of Bosma and Levie (2010), Harding and Cowling (2006), Hoogendoorn et al. (2011), Lehner (2011), Van Ryzin et al. (2009) and GEM (2009). Our results are also consistent with Ferreira (2005), who indicated that most social entrepreneurs in Portugal have a higher education.
As the other authors proposed, we argue that education can increase individuals’ sensitivity to social issues and provides a greater awareness about the need to act and, therefore, can be interpreted as an indirect predictor of the intentions to create a social organization. A higher educational level could also promote the development of important abilities for the development of a social venture, as well as the reinforcement of individuals’ confidence on their own competences (Co & Cooper, 2014). This can reduce some concerns and remove important constraints individuals face when they decide to launch a new social project (Lan et al., 2014). This will make the adoption of social entrepreneurial behaviour more likely.
With respect to education, we found that social entrepreneurs develop their education in different scientific areas (Ferreira, 2005), although we identify a greater predominance in the fields of humanities, economics, engineering and health, which were confirmed as relevant for the development of social initiatives. Lehner's research (2011) already noted, in the Austrian case, that most social entrepreneurs have a business background, suggesting the relevance of technical fields and social sciences. It appears that these conclusions are valid for both areas (business science and engineering), but they differ in the case of social sciences, which is found to be less important among social entrepreneurs in Portugal. The results related with the relevance of business education, is in line with the idea of Baral et al. (2012), stating that the contact with the subject of (social) entrepreneurship has an influence on the emergence of new entrepreneurs.
Secondly, regarding professional experience, we discover that most social entrepreneurs are employed before launching the social venture (especially in the business sector), they are professionally satisfied, never have created an organization before, as well as their parents, and usually have prior experience in the management of organizations.
In accordance with Harding and Cowling (2006) and Bacq et al. (2011), the prior professional status positively affects the propensity to social entrepreneurship, as most social entrepreneurs are paid employees when they get involved in the venture. This also contrasts with Estrin et al. (2011), who find no support for any association between social entrepreneurship and prior occupational status.
We also verify that about half of the social entrepreneurs who were employed worked in the business sector. This result could be justified by the fact that this experience could make the use of business techniques easier in the resolution of social issues. The same is pointed out by Ármannsdóttir (2011), who find that in the Icelandic case, social entrepreneurs usually act in areas related to their previous job. Therefore, these individuals, when they get involved with a social venture, are going ahead with the use of a set of business practices, even if, in this case, it is in the social context. The result achieved could also be explained by the skills developed with the activity performed in the business sector (Lan et al., 2014).
We verify that an origin from the non-profit sector is least common among Portuguese social entrepreneurs, which contradicts the researchers who advocate a strong presence of individuals from this sector (Leahy & Villeneuve-Smith, 2009). This result also does not support the researchers who find that social entrepreneurs are prone to launch a social venture in areas that allow a go ahead with their work on a social issue (Shumate et al., 2014). A justification for this evidence could be provided by Johnson (2003), who claims that individuals with extensive experience in the social sector will be more reluctant to use business language, and therefore, they will be more traditional when conceiving a model of social response.
Although our empirical evidence suggests that some career paths encourage more practice of social entrepreneurship than others, as we observe that there are different entrepreneurial profiles, characterized by different past professional experiences. The same is found by Germak and Robinson (2013), who claim that social entrepreneurs could arise from different professional contexts, with some individuals having worked in the traditional business sector and others have not.
We also find that previous professional experiences are able to shape the way social entrepreneurs develop their activities within a new organization. In fact, employed, retired or professionally satisfied individuals are more likely to work as volunteers, while paid employee are more likely to be individuals who are not labour active or not satisfied at work. Likewise, some researchers argue that social (or economic) entrepreneurship can be a path that individuals follow to compensate their professional dissatisfaction (Morfopoulos & London, 2010; Smith-Hunter et al., 2003). Thus, our empirical evidence suggests that pursuing a socially entrepreneurial activity could help to satisfy different personal needs, such as: (i) finding a complementary activity for those who have stable and paid employment; (ii) finding an occupational activity for those who are retired; or (iii) finding a paid professional activity for those who are not employed or are job dissatisfied. In all of these cases, the common denominator is the individual desire to create social value. The first ‘kind’ of Portuguese social entrepreneur identified is consistent with the profile find by Bacq et al. (2011), in the Belgium and the Netherlands cases, where social entrepreneurship is seen as a volunteer activity developed outside the job.
Our research also indicates that when the individual, or their parents, have never created any organization, these individuals are the most involved people in the social entrepreneurship. A priori, we expected a reverse relationship, but this was not the case. Researchers are not unanimous in recognizing a correlation between economic and social entrepreneurship. The results are consistent with researchers who find a negative relationship (Estrin et al., 2013) and appear to contradict the proposition of the GEM report (2009), stating that entrepreneurial societies, in a traditional sense, are those that usually have a larger number of social entrepreneurs. Our findings are also contrary to those researchers who identify a positive relationship between the likelihood of individuals becoming social entrepreneurs and their parents’ or their family's entrepreneurial propensity, as well as that of their role models (Bosma et al., 2012; Chlosta et al., 2012; Laspita et al., 2012; Lee & Battilana, 2013; Schmitt-Rodermund, 2004).
To better understand our apparently paradoxical result, we proceeded to a more detailed analysis of the data. The study reveals that the previous creation of other organizations is more common in individuals whose family members already created an organization, in particular, their parents (the opposite succeeds in individuals who are not exposed to an entrepreneurial environment). These findings are consistent with social learning theory and role identification theory, about the influence of parental role models and subjective norms on entrepreneurial activities. Therefore, our results can be interpreted on the basis of the low entrepreneurial tradition observed among respondents, plausibly justified by the low entrepreneurial level in Portugal.
It should be noted that we identify most Portuguese social entrepreneurs as having a higher education. Thus, according to the Bosma et al.’s (2012) findings, social entrepreneurs would presumably be more influenced by the entrepreneurial models, due to their higher capacity to interpret and apply external knowledge. We also observed that the proportion of individuals whose parents have entrepreneurial experience is higher in the younger age groups; this finding is reduced with the increasing age of the respondents. Combining this result with the conclusions of Laspita et al. (2012), who shows that the influence of parents on an offspring's entrepreneurial intentions differs according to age (they observe the highest ascendance during adolescence, rather than childhood), we conclude that a greater influence of parental entrepreneurial behaviour occurs during youth and early adulthood.
Finally, we observe that prior experience in management appears to be associated with a higher propensity to develop social projects, since most of the social entrepreneurs in Portugal have this experience. Furthermore, we find that individuals’ entrepreneurial exposure constrains the way they construct their perceptions about the viability of the entrepreneurial ventures. In fact, individuals with experience in management primarily construct their opinion on the ownership (or not) of the necessary personal skills and, in a comparative manner, assign very low importance to the favourability of the external context.
The results of this investigation contrast that of similar valuations attached to the two elements (i.e. possession of required personal skills and favourability of the context) by individuals without management experience. Similarly, individuals who have never created an organization give greater relevance in their decision to the favourability of the external context than the more experienced (albeit in an indirect way, through their parents).
The empirical evidence shows that learning and experience acquired during the launching and management of organizations are important drivers of a social entrepreneurial behaviour, leading these individuals to a less external locus of control by feeling that their skills and efforts can influence their results (Bernardino & Freitas Santos, 2014; Brooks, 2009; Zwan, Thurik, & Grilo, 2010). The idea that management experience plays a mediator role in the motivation for a social entrepreneurial behaviour are supported by Nga and Shamuganathan (2010), to whom business and management education acts as a facilitator of the development of a social entrepreneurial personality. Our results add the effect of experience in management to the feeling of holding the required competences (e.g. self-efficacy) and a greater internal locus of control.
7ConclusionsSocial entrepreneurship has been recognized as a promising field to cope with the complex challenges that Portuguese society faces. The primary purpose of our study was to better understand whether education and professional background encourages the creation of social entrepreneurial initiatives in Portugal. Our results indicate that educational level and the area of study are relevant variables in the decision to get involved in social entrepreneurship. In fact, a high educational level in areas such as the humanities, economics, engineering or health, seems to be a predictor of the propensity to launch a new social venture.
Professional background is found to be an important antecedent of social entrepreneurship in Portugal, as most social entrepreneurs share a common professional path: (i) they were employed, particularly in the business sector; (ii) they were satisfied with their job; and (iii) they had experience in the management of organizations. Most of the individuals, or their parents, had never created an organization before. Nevertheless, we note that individuals’ entrepreneurial heritage could have some spillover effects, specifically when parents had previously launched an organization.
The individuals’ entrepreneurial context could also constrain the way entrepreneurs perceived the risks of creating a social venture. These experiences may lead to greater self-efficacy and an internal locus of control that are considered important elements for the formation of the intention to engage in social entrepreneurial activities. Finally, our findings suggest that professional background shapes the way social entrepreneurs are involved in the social organization as a volunteer or as a paid employee.
The present study adds new insights to the knowledge basis about the role of education and professional background on the decision to launch a new social venture. This is still an underdeveloped issue, where more quantitative studies are needed. We expand our empirical findings by including the Portuguese case, where studies are especially scant. The analysis also covers the relevance of the social entrepreneurs’ perceptions about the viability of the new social venture providing evidence that was not available for Portugal. A better understanding of the factors that play a role in the creation of social organizations has important practical and political implications. The results of the study may enable governments and policy-makers to stimulate, in an indirect way, the level of social activity in Portugal, since the public authorities act on the antecedents of social entrepreneurial behaviour. Thus, this could be achieved through the stimulus to education and to the development of programmes that promote management and business skills, since they are pointed out as instruments that increase the predisposition of individuals to social entrepreneurship. This implication could be particularly important for female entrepreneurs, given the low rate of female entrepreneurship and the highest propensity (in marginal terms) to social entrepreneurship (Villeneuve-Smith & Chung, 2013). The identification of the drivers of social entrepreneurship is important, not only because the potential that these organizations have on the creation of social value, but also because of the spillover effect that these drivers have on economic entrepreneurship.
This paper suffers from some limitations, which derive from the nature of the investigation (quantitative), the sample used (sampling error), and the data collection method (non-sampling error). Thus, the conclusions of this study must be considered carefully. Due to the exploratory nature of the empirical findings, we recommend that more research is needed on the antecedents of social entrepreneurship. A more extensive study, based on secondary data, would make it possible to use other more advanced statistical analysis, such as multiple regression analysis. Qualitative studies based on depth interviews could also improve our understanding of the social entrepreneurial process. Further investigation could also include a comparative study between social and for profit entrepreneurs’ background could be attempted in order to identify the differences between the two types of entrepreneurs.
