Author
Listed:
- Xu Yanfang
(Department of Corporate Finance, School of Business Renmin University of China, Beijing, 100872, China)
- Zhu Chunling
(Department of General Management, School of Business 122199 Renmin University of China , Beijing, 100872, China)
Abstract
Although a hybrid logic is widely recognized as the best institutional logic for social enterprises, why and how such a hybrid logic works for social enterprises is under-explored. Based on the institutional logic theory, we conduct a multiple-case study to investigate how and why the two competing logics are combined to form a hybrid logic during social entrepreneurial process. Data are collected from the in-depth semi-structured interviews with social entrepreneurs from three leading social enterprises in China. We categorize a hybrid logic model as a dominant logic model, which includes a social-dominant logic model and a commercial-dominant logic model, and an equality of dual logic model. We find that the adoption of a hybrid logic is affected by the type of a social enterprise and the motivation to acquire different legitimacy. Specifically, an integrated social enterprise adopts a commercial-dominant logic model while an external social enterprise employs a social-dominant logic model to achieve sustainability. An embedded social enterprise can adopt an equality of dual logic model from its establishment. Our study contributes to research on strategic social entrepreneurship by revealing the dynamic relationship among different types of social enterprises, the adoption of a hybrid logic at different entrepreneurial stages, the motivation to acquire different legitimacy, and business outcomes.
Suggested Citation
Xu Yanfang & Zhu Chunling, 2025.
"The Strategic Evolution of Institutional Logics Across Social Entrepreneurial Process: A Multiple Case Study,"
Entrepreneurship Research Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 429-457.
Handle:
RePEc:bpj:erjour:v:15:y:2025:i:2:p:429-457:n:1003
DOI: 10.1515/erj-2023-0372
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:bpj:erjour:v:15:y:2025:i:2:p:429-457:n:1003. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyterbrill.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.