Bridging the gap? Explicating the coping hybrid strategies used by social enterprises to manage institutional voids

What the paper says

Purpose The impacts of Institutional Voids (IVs) are expected to differ for Social Enterprises (SEs) and traditional for-profit enterprises. Similarly, SEs and for-profit enterprises are expected to differ in how they manage IVs. However, extant research has dominantly focused on the latter, thus overlooking how SEs navigate underdeveloped and challenging institutional regimes. Design/methodology/approach Relying on an exploratory multiple-case study approach of six SEs in Ghana, this study seeks to strengthen and deepen our understanding of social entrepreneurship in and around institutional voids such as those found in developing countries to specifically explore how SEs cope with formal market IVs. Findings The multiple case study findings suggest that SEs adopt various unique strategies such as partnerships/collaborations, image management, skills and capacity building initiatives, promotion/outreach, adaptive distribution and delivery setups among others to cope with or manage institutional voids. Research limitations/implications The small sample size coupled with the fact that the six organizations operate in two West African countries only, has implications for the generalizability of findings. However, this study, besides contributing to the institutional voids and institutional strategizing literature, identify the various strategies SEs adopt to respond to institutional voids from which we have developed the “Hybridity Coping Strategy Process Model,” depicting the three aggregate strategies that social enterprises rely on in achieving their aims while overcoming institutional voids. Practical implications Our theoretical model (Hybridity Coping Strategy and Process model) depicts three key strategic responses (creative action, linkages, and capability-building and education) that social entrepreneurs can adopt to tackle institutional voids. Social implications Practitioners (including for-profit enterprises intending to adopt a social enterprise label) can use the findings of this study as a guide on how to be competitive and succeed in challenging environments such as those found in Africa. Originality/value The study complements prior literature (studies of institutional voids) on organizations’ strategic responses to institutional voids by throwing light on the strategies that smaller organizations (such as small and medium social enterprises as in the case of our study) that lack resources and influence are adopting to navigate institutional voids whilst achieving their raison d‘être in understudied geographical contexts such as the setting of this study.