Sosyal Girişimlerin Gelişmesini Destekleyen Üniversite Platformlarının Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2021, Volume: 11 Issue: 2 Pt 1, 244 - 254, 01.08.2021

Burçin Hatipoğlu

https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.566827

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Araştırmanın amacı Türkiye'deki iki farklı üniversitede uygulanan dışarıya açık sosyal girişimcilik programlarının yürütme süreçlerini ve sonuçlarını değerlendirmektir. Her iki girişim de kendi başlarına başardıklarından daha fazlasını elde etmek için birden fazla ortakla stratejik olarak bir araya gelmiştir. Bu araştırmada programların çalışma prensiplerini incelemek amacı ile "ortaklarla etkileşim, sosyal problemlerin niteliği ve program çıktıları" değişken olarak kullanılmıştır. Veri toplama süreçleri; web tabanlı verilerin toplanması, katılımcı gözlemleme, program ortakları ve yararlanıcılarla ile yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler ve saha ziyaretini içermiştir. Sosyal girişimcilik ekosisteminin genişlediği ancak ölçek büyütme projeleri için olan destek programlarının azlığı ve sosyal yatırımcıların eksikliği belirlenmiştir. Bulgular, iki programın ortaklık geliştirmekte, fonlamada, içerikte ve çıktılarda farklılıklar sergilediğini göstermektedir. Ekosistemdeki karşılanmamış ihtiyaçları belirlemek, platformların güçlü yanlarını tanımlayabilmek ve tamamlayıcı kaynaklara sahip ortaklarla eşleşmek, iki platformun geliştirdikleri etkili stratejiler olarak bulunmuştur. Çalışma, üniversitelerin konumlarını tam olarak etkin kullanmadıklarını; sosyal girişimcilik programlarını öğretim ve araştırma ile bütünleştirerek ve belirleyecekleri sosyal sorunlara odaklanarak ekosistemin gelişmesine daha fazla katkıda bulunabileceklerini vurgulamıştır.

Keywords

Girişimci ekosistemi, sektörler arası sosyal ortaklık, sosyal girişimcilik, Türkiye, yükseköğretim

Evaluation of University-Based Platforms in Support of Social Entrepreneurship

Abstract

The study reports on the operationalization of social entrepreneurship programs that are implemented by two university-based platforms in Turkey. Both initiatives have strategically come together with multiple partners (e.g., for-profit and nonprofit businesses and local governmental agencies) in order to achieve more than what they can accomplish on their own. Resource sharing with the partners, nature of social problems, and program outputs and outcomes were used for exploring the working principles of the two programs. The data collection included secondary data, participant observations, semi-structured interviews with program partners and beneficiaries, and a site visit. The social entrepreneurship ecosystem in the given context was found to be growing yet with gaps in support systems for scale-up projects and impact investing. The findings suggest that the two programs varied in their partnership arrangements, funding, scope, and outputs consistent with their program goals. Identifying the unmet needs in the ecosystem, knowing the platforms' strengths and capabilities, and matching with partners that have complementary resources are found to be effective strategies of the platforms. The study argues that universities are not fully utilizing their vital position to contribute to the improvements of the ecosystem, and more can be achieved by integrating the programs with teaching and research and increasing their specialization in various social issues (e.g., gender equality).

Keywords

Cross-sector social partnerships, entrepreneurial ecosystem, higher education, social entrepreneurship, Turkey

References

• Al Taji, F. N. A., & Bengo, I. (2019). The distinctive managerial challenges of hybrid organizations: Which skills are required? Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 10(3), 328–345.
• Apostolakis, C. (2011). The role of higher education in enhancing social entrepreneurship. International Journal of Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 1(2), 124–137.
• Ashoka (2020). About Ashoka. Retrieved from https://www.ashoka.org/ tr/country/turkey (November 1, 2020).
• Atakan, M. S., & Eker, T. (2007). Corporate identity of a socially responsible university – a case from the Turkish higher education sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 55–68.
• Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22.
• Austin, J. E., & Seitanidi, M. M. (2012). Collaborative value creation: A review of partnering between nonprofits and businesses: Part I. Value creation spectrum and collaboration stages. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41(5), 726–758.
• Belitski, M., & Heron, K. (2017). Expanding entrepreneurship education ecosystems. Journal of Management Development, 36(2), 163–177.
• Bloom, P. N., & Dees, G. (2008). Cultivate your ecosystem. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(1), 47–53.
• British Council (2016). Social enterprise in a global context: The role of higher education institutions. Retrieved from https://www.britishcouncil.org/ sites/default/files/social_enterprise_in_a_global_context_-_the_role_ of_heis_british_council_0.pdf (June 15, 2020).
• Capella-Peris, C., Gil-Gómez, J., Martí-Puig, M., & Ruíz-Bernardo, P. (2020). Development and validation of a scale to assess social entrepreneurship competency in higher education. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 23–39.
• Cengiz, E. (2014). Assessments on university-industry cooperation. [Article in Turkish] Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 4(1), 1–8.
• Cetindamar, D., & Hopkins, T. (2008). Enhancing students’ responsibility towards society through civic involvement projects. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(4), 401–410.
• Cinar, R. (2019). Delving into social entrepreneurship in universities: is it legitimate yet? Regional Studies, Regional Science, 6(1), 217–232.
• CSI (2020). Centre for social impact. Retrieved from https://www.csi.edu.au/ (November 21, 2020).
• Dentoni, D., Bitzer, V., & Pascucci, S. (2016). Cross-sector partnerships and the co-creation of dynamic capabilities for stakeholder orientation. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 35–53.
• Durán-Sánchez, A., Del Río, M. d. l. C., Álvarez-García, J., & García-Vélez, D. F. (2019). Mapping of scientific coverage on education for entrepreneurship in higher education. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 13(1/2), 84–104.
• Edwards-Schachter, M. E., Matti, C. E., & Alcántara, E. (2012). Fostering quality of life through social innovation: A living lab methodology study case. Review of Policy Research, 29(6), 672–692.
• Ersen, T., Kaya, D., & Meydanoğlu, Z. (2010). Social entrepreneurship and need analysis of Turkey report. [Text in Turkish] Retrieved from http:// www.sosyalgirisim.org (November 1, 2020).
• Fındık, D., Akdeve, E., & Osmanbaşoğlu, G. K. (2020). Interconnected areas of research: Collaborations in social innovation. In Ç. Doğru (Ed.), Leadership styles, innovation, and social entrepreneurship in the era of digitalization (pp. 190–211). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Goddard, J. (2017). The strategic positioning of cities in 21st century challenges: The civic university and the city. In F. X. Grau, J. Goddard, B. L. Hall, E. Hazelkorn, & R. Tandon (Eds.), Higher education in the world 6. Towards a socially responsible university: balancing the global with the local (pp. 115–127). Girona: Global University Network for Innovation (GUNI).
• Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2011). Applied thematic analysis. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Harrisson, D., Chaari, N., & Comeau-Vallée, M. (2012). Intersectoral alliance and social innovation: When corporations meet civil society. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 83(1), 1–24.
• Huang-Saad, A., Duval-Couetil, N., & Park, J. (2018). Technology and talent: capturing the role of universities in regional entrepreneurial ecosystems. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 12(2), 92–116.
• IMECE (2018). Social innovation ecosystem in Turkey 2018. Retrieved from https://graphcommons.com/graphs/033fcd07-d1e3-4669-a0b0-425dc6c1289f?auto=true (August 1, 2020).
• Isenberg, D. (2011). The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economy policy: Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Babson Park, MA: Babson Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Project, Babson College.
• Karğın, M., Aktaş, H., & Gökbunar, R. (2018). Social entrepreneurship in universities: Opportunities and suggestions. [Article in Turkish] Yönetim ve Ekonomi: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1), 155–170.
• Kimbu, A. N., & Ngoasong, M. Z. (2016). Women as vectors of social entrepreneurship. Annals of Tourism Research, 60, 63–79.
• KUSIF (2017). Investment Ready Social Enterprises Certificate Program. Retrieved from https://kusif.ku.edu.tr/content/investment-ready-social-enterprises-certificate-program (September 1, 2020).
• Lehner, O. M., & Kansikas, J. (2012). Opportunity recognition in social entrepreneurship: A thematic meta analysis. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 21(1), 25–58.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Link, A. N., & Sarala, R. M. (2019). Advancing conceptualisation of university entrepreneurial ecosystems: The role of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial firms. International Small Business Journal, 37(3), 289–310.
• MacDonald, A., Clarke, A., Huang, L., & Seitanidi, M. (2019). Partner strategic capabilities for capturing value from sustainability-focused multi-stakeholder partnerships. Sustainability, 11(3), 557.
• Markuerkiaga, L., Caiazza, R., Igartua, J. I., & Errasti, N. (2016). Factors fostering students’ spin-off firm formation. Journal of Management Development, 35(6), 814–846.
• Mikado Consulting (2020). Who are we? Retrieved from http://www. mikadoconsulting.com/en/sayfa/9/biz-kimiz?# (November 1, 2020).
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Monzón, J. L., & Chaves, R. (2017). Recent evolutions of the social economy in the European Union. Brussels: European Economic and Social Committee, CIRIEC.
• Neck, H. M., Meyer, G. D., Cohen, B., & Corbett, A. C. (2004). An entrepreneurial system view of new venture creation. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(2), 190–208.
• NESsT (2018). What is a social enterprise? Retrieved from https://www. nesst.org/social-enterprise (November 1, 2020).
• Pache, A.-C., & Chowdhury, I. (2012). Social entrepreneurs as institutionally embedded entrepreneurs: Toward a new model of social entrepreneurship education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(3), 494–510.
• Paunescu, C., & Cantaragiu, R. (2013). The social role of university entrepreneurship. In C. Paunescu, & R. Cantaragiu (Eds.), Strategic role of tertiary education and technologies for sustainable competitive advantage (pp. 103–119). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’Regan, N., & James, P. (2015). Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: A systematic review. Group & Organization Management, 40(3), 428–461.
• Plymouth Social Enterprise (2020). Social enterprise city. Retrieved from https://plymsocent.org.uk/about-us/social-enterprise-city/ (March 1, 2020).
• Roundy, P. T. (2017). Social entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. International Journal of Social Economics, 44(9), 1252–1267.
• Seelos, C., Mair, J., Battilana, J., & Dacin, M. T. (2011). The embeddedness of social entrepreneurship: Understanding variation across local communities. In C. Marquis, M. Lounsbury, & R. Greenwood (Eds.), Communities and organizations: Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 33, pp. 333–363). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• Selsky, J. W., & Parker, B. (2005). Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management, 31(6), 849–873.
• SoGIP (2018). About SoGiP. Retrieved from https://www.sogip.org/ hakkinda (November 11, 2020).
• 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).
• TUSEV (2020). Our objectives. Retrieved from https://www.tusev.org.tr/en/ about-us/our-objectives (June 25, 2020).
• United Nations (2016). Sustainable development goals. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/ (March 1, 2020).
• Van Tulder, R., Seitanidi, M. M., Crane, A., & Brammer, S. (2016). Enhancing the impact of cross-sector partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 1–17.
• VUB (2020). A platform in support of social entrepreneurs. Retrieved from https://platform.vubsocialentrepreneurship.com/ (June 15, 2020).
• Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. (2009). A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(5), 519–532.