IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04480146.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An approach to the evaluation of social enterprises based on entrepreneurial responsibility The case study of the social enterprise 1001fontaines
[Une approche de l'évaluation des entreprises sociales fondée sur la responsabilité entrepreneuriale L'étude de cas de l'entreprise sociale 1001fontaines]

Author

Listed:
  • Guillaume Martin

    (UNISTRA - Université de Strasbourg)

  • Jean-Paul Mereaux

    (CEJESCO - Centre d'études juridiques sur l'efficacité des systèmes continentaux - EA 4693 - MSH-URCA - Maison des Sciences Humaines de Champagne-Ardenne - URCA - Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne)

Abstract

The evaluation of social enterprises is a subject that is debated because of its multidimensionality. The aim of this research is to translate this multidimensionality under investigation in term of monetary value. The methodology of the case study with an embedded design is here proposed to better translate the 1001fontaines'value that is expressed at different levels in the organization. Moreover, the opportunity to conduct interviews with internal and external project stakeholders gradually helps to identify their motivations to support this social enterprise. The attempt to approach the point of balance between financial profitability on the one hand and the fulfillment of corporate social objectives on the other hand have led to the first tracks to build a model translating this embedded value in a monetary point of view.

Suggested Citation

  • Guillaume Martin & Jean-Paul Mereaux, 2017. "An approach to the evaluation of social enterprises based on entrepreneurial responsibility The case study of the social enterprise 1001fontaines [Une approche de l'évaluation des entreprises socia," Post-Print hal-04480146, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04480146
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04480146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04480146/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anant K. Sundaram & Andrew C. Inkpen, 2004. "The Corporate Objective Revisited," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 350-363, June.
    2. A. Fayolle & H. Matlay, 2010. "Social entrepreneurship : a multicultural and multidimensional perspective," Post-Print halshs-00586831, HAL.
    3. Anant K. Sundaram & Andrew C. Inkpen, 2004. "Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”: A Reply," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 370-371, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Guillaume Martin & Jean-Paul Mereaux, 2017. "The Success Of Social Microfranchises Is Triggered By Entrepreneurial Responsibility Of A Local And A Sustainable Human Capital [La réussite des micro-franchises sociales passe par la responsabilit," Post-Print hal-04480175, HAL.
    2. Lee Siew Tee & Ismail Nizam, 2020. "The Influence of Corporate Governance on Financial Performance Mediated by Gender Diversity," Journal of Asian Business Strategy, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 10(1), pages 61-79, January.
    3. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2012. "The political role of the business firm: An ordonomic concept of corporate citizenship developed in comparison with the Aristoleian idea of individual citizenship," Discussion Papers 2012-1, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    4. Witold J. Henisz & Sinziana Dorobantu & Lite J. Nartey, 2014. "Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(12), pages 1727-1748, December.
    5. Jan Kultys, 2016. "Controversies About Agency Theory As Theoretical Basis For Corporate Governance," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 7(4), pages 613-634, December.
    6. David Rönnegard & N. Craig Smith, 2024. "A Rawlsian Rule for Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(2), pages 295-308, March.
    7. Suchanek Andreas, 2012. "Unternehmensverantwortung als Vermeidung relevanter Inkonsistenzen / Corporate Responsibility: The Avoidance of Relevant Inconsistencies," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 63(1), pages 241-260, January.
    8. Jonathan Doh, 2022. "Introduction to the Point‐Counterpoint: The Corporate Objective as a Contingency," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 518-525, March.
    9. Arzi Adbi & Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Chirantan Chatterjee, 2020. "Stakeholder Orientation and Market Impact: Evidence from India," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 479-496, January.
    10. Itziar Castelló & Michael Etter & Finn Årup Nielsen, 2016. "Strategies of Legitimacy Through Social Media: The Networked Strategy," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 402-432, May.
    11. Garrod, Brian & Fyall, Alan & Leask, Anna & Reid, Elaine, 2012. "Engaging residents as stakeholders of the visitor attraction," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 1159-1173.
    12. Adams, Dawda & Adams, Kweku & Ullah, Subhan & Ullah, Farid, 2019. "Globalisation, governance, accountability and the natural resource ‘curse’: Implications for socio-economic growth of oil-rich developing countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 128-140.
    13. Kevin Levillain & Blanche Segrestin, 2018. "From Primacy to Commitment: Revising corporate governance theories to account for recent legal innovations in the US," Post-Print hal-01777788, HAL.
    14. Valentinov, Vladislav & Roth, Steffen, 2024. "Stakeholder theory: Exploring systems‐theoretic and process‐philosophic connections," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 41(2), pages 301-315.
    15. Axel v. Werder, 2011. "Corporate Governance and Stakeholder Opportunism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1345-1358, October.
    16. Kevin Levillain & Blanche Segrestin, 2018. "From Primacy to Commitment: Revising corporate governance theories to account for recent legal innovations in the US," Working Papers hal-01777788, HAL.
    17. Heidingsfelder, Jens, 2019. "Private sustainability governance in the making – A case study analysis of the fragmentation of sustainability governance for the gold sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Daniel G. Arce, 2007. "Is Agency Theory Self‐Activating?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 708-720, October.
    19. Andrew C. Inkpen & Anant K. Sundaram, 2022. "The Endurance of Shareholder Value Maximization as the Preferred Corporate Objective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 555-568, March.
    20. Midtgård, Kenneth & Selart, Marcus, 2024. "The cognitive perspective in strategic choice," SocArXiv 4xpza, Center for Open Science.

    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:hal:journl:hal-04480146. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.