IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/corgov/v15y2007i2p382-392.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Communitarian Perspectives on Social Enterprise

Author

Listed:
  • Rory Ridley‐Duff

Abstract

Concepts of social enterprise have been debated repeatedly, and continue to cause confusion. In this paper, a meta‐theoretical framework is developed through discussion of individualist and communitarian philosophy. Philosophers from both traditions build social theories that emphasise either consensus (a unitarist outlook) or diversity (a pluralist outlook). The various discourses in corporate governance reflect these assumptions and create four distinct approaches that impact on the relationship between capital and labour. In rejecting the traditional discourse of private enterprise, social enterprises have adopted other approaches to tackle social exclusion, each derived from different underlying beliefs about the purpose of enterprise and the nature of governance. The theoretical framework offers a way to understand the diversity found within the sector, including the newly constituted Community Interest Company (CIC).

Suggested Citation

  • Rory Ridley‐Duff, 2007. "Communitarian Perspectives on Social Enterprise," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 382-392, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:15:y:2007:i:2:p:382-392
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00568.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00568.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2007.00568.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Conyon & Richard B. Freeman, 2004. "Shared Modes of Compensation and Firm Performance U.K. Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980–2000, pages 109-146, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marian Eabrasu, 2012. "A Moral Pluralist Perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility: From Good to Controversial Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 110(4), pages 429-439, November.
    2. Chris Mason & Bob Doherty, 2016. "A Fair Trade-off? Paradoxes in the Governance of Fair-trade Social Enterprises," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 451-469, July.
    3. Pyoungsoo Lee & Yong Won Seo, 2017. "Directions for Social Enterprise from an Efficiency Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Mary Han & Bill McKelvey, 2016. "How to Grow Successful Social Entrepreneurship Firms? Key Ideas from Complexity Theory," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(03), pages 243-280, September.
    5. Mike Bull & Rory Ridley-Duff, 2019. "Towards an Appreciation of Ethics in Social Enterprise Business Models," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 619-634, October.
    6. Elena-Simina Lakatos & Bercea Oana Bianca & Laura Bacali, 2016. "The concept of innovation in social economy. A review and a research agenda," Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research, Pro Global Science Association, vol. 11(1), pages 32-50, June.
    7. Mara Willemijn van Twuijver & Lucas Olmedo & Mary O’Shaughnessy & Thia Hennessy, 2020. "Rural social enterprises in Europe: A systematic literature review," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 35(2), pages 121-142, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nathalie Greenan & Marc-Arthur Diaye & Patricia Crifo, 2004. "Pourquoi les entreprises évaluent-elles individuellement leurs salariés ?," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 164(3), pages 27-55.
    2. Mohammad Ziaul Hoque & MD. Rabiul Islam & Mohammad Nurul Azam, 2013. "Board Committee Meetings and Firm Financial Performance: An Investigation of Australian Companies," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 503-528, December.
    3. Bryson, Alex & Freeman, Richard, 2008. "How does shared capitalism affect economic performance in the UK?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51596, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Noélie Delahaie & Richard Duhautois, 2019. "Profit‐Sharing and Wages: An Empirical Analysis Using French Data between 2000 and 2007," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 57(1), pages 107-142, March.
    5. Gilberto Tadeu Lima, 2010. "Profit Sharing, Capacity Utilization and Growth in a Post-Keynesian Macromodel," Chapters, in: Mark Setterfield (ed.), Handbook of Alternative Theories of Economic Growth, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Kato, Takao & Kauhanen, Antti, 2013. "Performance Pay and Enterprise Productivity: The Details Matter," ETLA Working Papers 21, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    7. David Card & Richard B. Freeman, 2004. "What Have Two Decades of British Economic Reform Delivered?," NBER Chapters, in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980–2000, pages 9-62, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Susan Helper & Morris M. Kleiner, 2009. "International Differences in Lean Production, Productivity, and Employee Attitudes," NBER Chapters, in: International Differences in the Business Practices and Productivity of Firms, pages 231-261, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Zwick, Thomas & Wolf, Elke, 2002. "Reassessing the Impact of High Performance Workplaces," ZEW Discussion Papers 02-07, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Douglas L. Kruse & Richard B. Freeman & Joseph R. Blasi, 2010. "Do Workers Gain by Sharing? Employee Outcomes under Employee Ownership, Profit Sharing, and Broad-Based Stock Options," NBER Chapters, in: Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-based Stock Options, pages 257-289, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Richard B. Freeman, 2008. "When Workers Share in Profits: Effort and Responses to Shirking," 'Angelo Costa' Lectures Serie, SIPI Spa, issue Lect. IX.
    12. Koskela, Erkki & König, Jan, 2010. "Profit Sharing, Wage Formation and Flexible Outsourcing under Labor Market Imperfection," IZA Discussion Papers 4707, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Lippert, Inge, 2008. "Perspektivenverschiebungen in der Corporate Governance: Neuere Ansätze und Studien der Corporate-Governance-Forschung," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Knowledge, Production Systems and Work SP III 2008-302, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. Jan König & Erkki Koskela, 2013. "The Role of Profit Sharing in Dual Labour Markets with Flexible Outsourcing," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 27(4), pages 351-370, December.
    15. Erkki Koskela & Jan König, 2007. "Strategic Outsourcing, Profit Sharing and Equilibrium Unemployment," CESifo Working Paper Series 2168, CESifo.
    16. Coles, Melvyn G & Petrongolo, Barbara, 2002. "A Test Between Unemployment Theories Using Matching Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 3241, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Erkki Koskela & Rune Stenbacka, 2004. "Profit Sharing, Credit Market Imperfections and Equilibrium Unemployment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(4), pages 677-701, December.
    18. Takao Kato & Ju Ho Lee & Jang-Soo Ryu, 2010. "The productivity effects of profit sharing, employee ownership, stock option and team incentive plans: evidence from Korean panel data," Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, in: Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, pages 111-135, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    19. Derek Jones & Panu Kalmi & Mikko Mäkinen, 2010. "The productivity effects of stock option schemes: evidence from Finnish panel data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, February.
    20. Koskela, Erkki & König, Jan, 2009. "Can Profit Sharing Lower Flexible Outsourcing? A Note," IZA Discussion Papers 4063, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:15:y:2007:i:2:p:382-392. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0964-8410&site=1 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.