@article{MairRathert, author = {Mair, Johanna and Rathert, Nikolas}, title = {Alternative organizing with social purpose: revisiting institutional analysis of market-based activity}, series = {Socio-Economic Review}, volume = {19}, journal = {Socio-Economic Review}, number = {2}, issn = {1475-147X}, doi = {10.1093/ser/mwz031}, pages = {817 -- 836}, abstract = {Given rampant economic inequality, social exclusion and overconsumption, organizing in markets increasingly focuses on leveraging commercial activity for a social purpose. Alternative forms of organizing have developed to overcome the deficiencies of contemporary capitalism. They have become prevalent in numerous institutional contexts through types of organizations such as social enterprises, cooperatives and platform-based sharing economy organizations. Our objective is to ignite research on alternative organizing. We build on two important institutional perspectives, Neo-institutionalism and Comparative Capitalism, to investigate how these organizations diverge from the archetypal corporation. In addition, we develop a framework to guide institutional analysis of the origins, enabling conditions and consequences of alternative organizing in contemporary markets and society. We conclude by laying out pathways for future research.}, language = {en} } @incollection{MairRathert, author = {Mair, Johanna and Rathert, Nikolas}, title = {Social Entrepreneurship: Prospects for the Study of Market Based Activity and Social Change}, series = {The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological and Organizational Perspectives}, booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological and Organizational Perspectives}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {9780198802280}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {359 -- 373}, abstract = {Corporate social responsibility (CSR) continues to grow as an area of interest in academia and business. Encompassing broad topics such as the relationship between business, society, and government, environmental issues, globalization, and the social and ethical dimensions of management and corporate operation, CSR has become an increasingly interdisciplinary subject relevant to areas of economics, sociology, and psychology, among others. New directions in CSR research include advanced 'micro' based investigations in organizational behaviour and human resource management, additional studies of environmental social responsibility and sustainability, further research on 'strategic' CSR, connections between social responsibility and entrepreneurship, and improvements in methods and data analysis as the field matures. Through authoritative contributions from international scholars across the social sciences, this Handbook provides a cohesive overview of this recent expansion. It introduces new perspectives, new methodologies, and new evidence from a range of disciplines to encourage and facilitate interdisciplinary research and global implementation of corporate social responsibility.}, language = {en} } @incollection{MairRathert, author = {Mair, Johanna and Rathert, Nikolas}, title = {Let's Talk about Problems: Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing, Social Enterprises, and Institutional Context}, series = {Organizational Hybridity: Perspectives, Processes, Promises (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 69)}, booktitle = {Organizational Hybridity: Perspectives, Processes, Promises (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 69)}, editor = {Besharov, Marya and Mitzinneck, Bjoern}, publisher = {Emerald Publishing Limited}, doi = {10.1108/S0733-558X20200000069009}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {189 -- 208}, abstract = {Social enterprises have long been considered ideal settings for studying hybrid organizing due to their combination of social and economic goals and activities. In this chapter, the authors argue that the current research focus on hybrid organizing foregrounds the paradox, conflicting logics, and multiple identities associated with the pursuit of multiple goals but underappreciates the relationship between hybrid organizing and its institutional context. Recognizing that the primary objective of social enterprises is to tackle social problems, the authors introduce the social problem domain as an analytically useful and theoretically interesting meso-level to examine the role of context for hybrid organizing and to advance conversations on hybridity in organizational theory. Social problem domains offer insights into the political, cultural, and material differences in how various societies deal with social problems, which in turn affects hybrid organizing. The authors provide empirical insights derived from an analysis of social enterprises across three countries and social problem domains. The authors show how the institutional arrangements of social enterprises differ considerably across contexts, and how these arrangements affect how social enterprises become more or less similar compared to traditional ways of organizing in these problem domains. Based on these findings, the authors outline a research agenda on social enterprises that focuses on examining the nature, antecedents, and outcomes of hybrid organizing around social problems across multiple levels of analysis. With this chapter, the authors move the focus of social enterprise research in organizational theory from studying how these organizations cope with multiple logics and goals toward studying how they engage in markets for public purpose.}, language = {en} } @incollection{MairRathert, author = {Mair, Johanna and Rathert, Nikolas}, title = {Sozialunternehmertum}, series = {Handbuch Innovationsforschung}, booktitle = {Handbuch Innovationsforschung}, editor = {Bl{\"a}ttel-Mink, Birgit and Schulz-Schaeffer, Ingo and Windeler, Arnold}, publisher = {Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {Printed: 978-3-658-17668-6 / eBook: 978-3-658-17668-6}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {1 -- 16}, abstract = {Sozialunternehmertum bezieht sich auf die innovative Nutzung wie Kombination von Ressourcen zur Bew{\"a}ltigung sozialer Probleme und Bed{\"u}rfnisse. Wir zeichnen Debatten um die Definition von Sozialunternehmertum nach und stellen institutionellen Wandel und die Verfolgung vielf{\"a}ltiger Ziele als Schl{\"u}sselmerkmale von Sozialunternehmertum heraus. Auf Basis einer Diskussion verschiedener Arbeiten der Management-, Organisations- und Unternehmertumsforschung er{\"o}ffnen wir eine pr{\"a}gnante und generative Perspektive auf Sozialunternehmertum. Sie soll helfen, die Erforschung sozialer Innovationen voran zu treiben.}, language = {de} } @incollection{MairRathert, author = {Mair, Johanna and Rathert, Nikolas}, title = {Social Entrepreneurship}, series = {Handbook of Innovation}, booktitle = {Handbook of Innovation}, editor = {Schulz-Schaeffer, Ingo and Windeler, Arnold and Bl{\"a}ttel-Mink, Birgit}, publisher = {Springer Nature Switzerland AG}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-031-25143-6}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-031-25143-6_25-1}, publisher = {Hertie School}, abstract = {Social entrepreneurship refers to the innovative use and combination of resources to address social problems and needs. Social entrepreneurship and social enterprises constitute an increasingly relevant form of organizing across different contexts, reflected in growing interest from policymakers in Europe and beyond. We provide an overview of definitional debates around social entrepreneurship and focus on institutional change and the pursuit of multiple goals as key characteristics of social entrepreneurship. These characteristics set social entrepreneurship apart from commercial entrepreneurship focused on providing products and services but also create unique challenges. On the one hand, as research on social entrepreneurship and institutional change has shown, social entrepreneurship involves the consideration of the context-specific nature of social problems and social innovations. In addition, scholarship on social entrepreneurship and the pursuit of multiple goals emphasizes a set of resulting demands on organizational governance, including ensuring accountability and acquiring resources while straddling diverse institutional contexts. Interrogating the existing literature in management, organization, and entrepreneurship studies on these aspects, our discussion offers a succinct and generative perspective on social entrepreneurship that helps to advance the study of social innovation.}, language = {en} } @article{BuenderRathertMair, author = {B{\"u}nder, Tobias and Rathert, Nikolas and Mair, Johanna}, title = {Sustaining the Integration of Social Objectives Over Time: A Case-Based Analysis of Access to Medicine in the Pharmaceutical Industry}, series = {Business \& Society}, journal = {Business \& Society}, doi = {10.1177/00076503231182667}, abstract = {Companies increasingly seek to strategically integrate social objectives in commercial activities to address societal challenges, yet little is known about how companies can sustain such a commitment over time. To address this question, we conduct a case-based, abductive study of two pharmaceutical companies widely considered industry leaders in facilitating access to medicine over a 20-year period (2000-2019). We identify product and operation-level integration as distinct types of integration efforts enacted by these companies. Tracing the intraorganizational dynamics associated with these efforts, we theorize that sustained integration is contingent on companies' ability to respond to and address the challenges specific to product and operation-level integration. The theoretical framework we develop contributes to an emerging debate on the potential of companies to make progress on societal challenges by strategically integrating social objectives, including but not limited to those related to global health.}, language = {en} } @incollection{BuenderRathertMair, author = {B{\"u}nder, Tobias and Rathert, Nikolas and Mair, Johanna}, title = {Understanding firm- and field-level change toward sustainable development: insights from the pharmaceutical industry and access to medicines, 1960‒2020}, series = {Handbook on the Business of Sustainability}, booktitle = {Handbook on the Business of Sustainability}, editor = {George, Gerard and Haas, Martine and Joshi, Havovi and McGahan, Anita and Tracey, Paul}, publisher = {Edward Elgar}, address = {Cheltenham}, isbn = {9781839105333}, doi = {10.4337/9781839105340.00025}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {300 -- 319}, abstract = {Insufficient access to medicines is a persistent global problem that affects billions of people in low- and middle-income countries. In this chapter, we use access to medicines as a case to understand how business can become instrumental in making progress on persistent and global problems we associate with sustainable development. We examine the emergence and evolution of access to medicines as a mandate for the pharmaceutical industry to contribute to sustainable development. More specifically, we trace the historical developments of corporate social initiatives in the industry and revisit existing research on access to medicines in management and related fields. We then introduce three distinct analytical perspectives - field emergence and change, firm heterogeneity, organizational processes - to examine access to medicine, expose managerial challenges and offer a research agenda that helps to advance research on access to medicines and, more generally, on corporate efforts to address pressing global problems subsumed under the Sustainable Development Goals.}, language = {en} } @article{MairRathert, author = {Mair, Johanna and Rathert, Nikolas}, title = {The Political Side of Social Enterprises: A Phenomenon-Based Study of Sociocultural and Policy Advocacy}, series = {Journal of Management Studies}, journal = {Journal of Management Studies}, doi = {10.1111/joms.13134}, abstract = {This study explores the often-overlooked political dimension of social enterprises, particularly their advocacy activities aimed at influencing public policy, legislation, norms, attitudes, and behaviour. While traditional management research has focused on commercial activity and the beneficiary-oriented aspects of social enterprises, this paper considers their upstream political activity. Using a phenomenon-based approach, we analyse original survey data from 718 social enterprises across seven countries and six problem domains to identify factors associated with their engagement in advocacy. Our findings reveal that public spending and competition in social enterprises' problem domains, as well as their governance choices - legal form, sources of income, and collaborations - are significantly associated with advocacy activities. We propose a new theoretical framework to understand these dynamics, positioning social enterprises as key players in markets for public purpose. This research underscores the importance of recognizing the political activities of social enterprises and offers new insights for studying hybrid organizing and organizations that address complex societal challenges. By highlighting the integral role of advocacy, our study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of how social enterprises drive social change, not only through direct service provision but also by shaping the broader sociopolitical environment.}, language = {en} }