Social Enterprise Recommendations Overview

Future research should:
1) Explore the prevalence of different combinations of deviance and ignorance in contexts more conducive to integrative public leadership.
2) Seek to better understand the role of politicians, politics, and administrators in such clandestine forms of leadership, and particularly their interactions with practitioners.
3) Explore how political ideas are translated into public value via complex chains of interactions (probably) involving deviance and ignorance at many points in the chain. The ethnographic methods may be better suited to uncover how practitioners creatively bend and appropriate governmental policies and techniques, the extent to which government officials and policy-makers are aware of such deviance, and, in particular, the interplay between CSO practitioners and government officials in shaping these hidden spaces.

Philanthropic funders in the nonprofit sector may learn from the social finance organizations and their more ‘‘empowering’’ use of social performance measurement.”

There is a lack of involvement by social enterprises in determining the measurement standards against which they are required to report. In most cases, social enterprises were offered a menu of reporting measures from which to choose. Therefore, while social enterprises do have some flexibility in selecting measures that are appropriate for them, it is likely that social enterprises may initially find the practices burdensome and less relevant for them. As practitioners continue to develop new measurement practices, as well as update existing ones, the authors suggest that they make greater efforts to include social entrepreneurs in the process.

The advantages that come from the economies of scale inherent in state provision of healthcare can also prove to be a disadvantage at a community level.Flexible, bespoke services that are more closer and more connected to the community are more likely to be trusted and they could be more effective at performing certain roles. Investments should be made where the greatest health gains ca potentially be achieved. Social enterprises is worthy of attention as an alternative provider of health and social care provision due to their ability to work flexibility and act as a “boundary spanner” on behalf of beneficiaries

1) More studies should testing the results in different organisations with different characteristics in different settings with different forms of intervention. This will enable exploration of whether the impacts are related specifically to the social enterprise organisational form, or whether they are more related to the specific context in which the social enterprise operates.

1) explore about how social entrepreneurs and social workers can work together to improve the current interventions and to devise new ones. This would enable researchers to compare the effectiveness of SE interventions when
performed solely by SEs versus by social workers versus those that involve a partnership between SEs and social workers.
2) lessen the gap between SW and SE research so as to advance SW research amid the growing complexity of social problems and the increasing need to create workable solutions and sustainable impacts that each field alonecannot solve sufficiently. Thus, future research could examine the strategies employed by social entrepreneurs working in HIV/AIDS-related problems in other settings (e.g., Echoing Green, L3C social enterprises) and non-affiliated SEs and in the ‘developed’ world since most of Ashoka’s.
3) include larger samples and also surveys to test the efficacy of the SE strategies identified here.
4) explore the economic, technology and new clinical/therapy approaches adopted by SEs working in the in the HIV/AIDS to understand their efficacy compared to existing approaches.
5) look into how business practices and social interventions of SEs are possibly impacting upon clients and provide a better linkage between SE interventions and potential implications to disadvantaged population. HIV/AIDS to understand their efficacy compared to existing approaches.

To further research, the authors advocate a view of SE as a hybrid form, where the dual mission of social and economic value creation acts as an essential criterion to delineate SE from other related phenomena. Also, there is a lack of large-scale empirical data hampers evaluating the true effects of SE on a societal level. While SE has been touted as a powerful mechanism to alleviate poverty and bring about institutional change, robust and longitudinal evidence to back up these claims. Third, research typically engages with only one level of analysis at a time. However, SE is inherently a multilevel phenomenon, and conducting research at only one analytical level not only misrepresents the phenomenon but also, risks foregoing the opportunities for advancing knowledge by means of multilevel research (see Shepherd, 2011) into SE phenomena. In fact, the focus on only one level of analysis at a time that we discern in the literature renders understanding the antecedents and outcomes of SE difficult.