International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences
Volume 2, Issue 1, February 2014, Pages: 16-21
Received: Dec. 6, 2013;
Published: Dec. 30, 2013
Views 2703 Downloads 138
Chang-Lin Yang, Department of Business Administration, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan; Social Enterprise Research Center, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan
Leemen Lee, Department of Business Administration, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan; Social Enterprise Research Center, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan
Yun-Chen Lee, Department of Business Administration, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan
This study classifies different types of social enterprises to clarify the problems of different types and propose methods of improvement. This study divides social enterprises into four types: benchmark driven, profit seeking, self-sufficient and mission driven, based on business operating situation. Moreover, empirical research is conducted to demonstrate the social enterprise development diagram through in-depth interviews. The respondents were mainly senior managers and social entrepreneurs. According to the interview results, the main characteristics of SEs are: 1. must content with poor public understanding of social responsibility and the concept of social enterprises; 2. Most social enterprises operate alone and lack group strength; 3. Most social enterprises are small-scale and lack competition. Ways to improve social enterprises include: 1. promote the concept of social enterprises and social entrepreneurs; 2. promote the social symbiotic system; 3. provide social enterprises with government funds and other resources.
Development of Growth Strategies for Social Enterprises, International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences.
Vol. 2, No. 1,
2014, pp. 16-21.
Alter, K., (2007), Social enterprise typology. United State: Virtur Ventures LLC.
Bidet, E., and Eum, H.S., (2011), "Social enterprise in South Korea: history and diversity". Social Enterprise Journal, 7(1), 69-85.
CAREUS, http://www.c-are-us.org.tw. 18.03.2013.
Chan, K. T., Kuan, Y.Y., and Wang, S.T., (2011), "Similarities and divergences: comparison of social enterprises in Hong Kong and Taiwan", Social Enterprise Journal, 7(1), 33-49.
Defourny, J., and Nyssens, M., (2008), "Social enterprise in Europe: recent trends and developments", Social Enterprise Journal, 4(3): 202-228.
Dialogue in the dark TPE, http://www.dialogue-in-the-dark-tpe.com. 18.03.2013.
Haughton, C., (2008), "The Edge of Reason". Director, 61, 70-74.
Home Affairs Department Hong Kong, http://www.social-enterprises.gov.hk, 18.03.2013.
Homemakers’ Union and Consumer Cooperative, http://www.hucc-coop.tw. 18.03.2013.
Mendell, M., (2007), Social Enterprise: A North American Perspective, Concordia University, Canada.
News and Market, http://www.newsmarket.com.tw. 18.03.2013.
Oko Green, http://www.okogreen.com.tw. 18.03.2013.
Ridley-Duff, R. J., and Bull, M., (2011), Understanding Social Enterprise: Theory and Practice, London: Sage Publications.
Social Enterprise Alliance. http://www.se-alliance.org/ what-is-social-enterprise, 18.03.2013.
Social Enterprise UK. http://www.socialenterprise.org.uk/ about/ about-social-enterprise, 18.03.2013.
Taiwan Social Enterprise Innovation Association, http://www.management.fju.edu.tw/subweb/seietw. 18.03.2013.
The Garden of Hope Foundation, http://www.goh.org.tw. 18.03.2013.
The Social Enterprise Council of Canada. http://www.enterprisingnonprofits.ca/what-social-enterprise, 18.03.2013.
WILDGREEN, http://www.wildgreen.tw. 18.03.2013.
Wu Wei Wu, http://www.5wayhouse.org. 18.03.2013.