Summary of project findings
We hosted seminars at Northampton, Sheffield Hallam, Birmingham, Manchester Metropolitan and Oxford Universities. At the first four seminars places were limited to 30 participants (plus speakers). At the final seminar 40 participants attended. Each seminar was advertised in advance through social and traditional media. At each event demand for places exceeded capacity. Demand was highest amongst the academic community (as would be expected). Here there was a broadly equal mix between PhD students and early or mid-career researchers plus around five at Professorial level. At each seminar we also hosted at least 10 social enterprise practitioners (18 at the final seminar). We found it more difficult to attract policy makers to the events, although each event attracted at least one person from this group.
The seminars attracted a core group of around 20 people who attended at least four of the seminars. Around 15 people attended 2 or 3 of the seminars. Additionally each event attracted local practitioners and PhD students from the host university. As a broad overview the “core group” consisted of two professorial level staff, seven early and mid-career researchers, six PhD students and five practitioners.
Due to the high level of demand for the seminars and the commitment of a wider core group extending beyond the team of investigators we also held two additional seminars during the grant period. These were funded by the host universities (Glasgow Caledonian and Northampton) and participants covered their own expenses. It is anticipated that these seminars will continue on this basis for the foreseeable future. The next one will be held at the University of East London in October.
The primary objectives of the seminar series were to develop an international network of critical social enterprise researchers and practitioners, to make critical research more accessible, and to engage practitioners and policy makers in the development of a future research agenda. We feel this has been achieved, evidenced in part by the continuance of the seminar series, also by some of the outputs listed under Exploitation routes, and finally be members of the co-investigators and some of the “core group” developing a bid to the ESRC to research the relationship between ideas(and ideologies) and social enterprise policies cross nationally (an idea which emerged from dialogue with practitioners and policy makers through the seminars).
The seminars attracted a core group of around 20 people who attended at least four of the seminars. Around 15 people attended 2 or 3 of the seminars. Additionally each event attracted local practitioners and PhD students from the host university. As a broad overview the “core group” consisted of two professorial level staff, seven early and mid-career researchers, six PhD students and five practitioners.
Due to the high level of demand for the seminars and the commitment of a wider core group extending beyond the team of investigators we also held two additional seminars during the grant period. These were funded by the host universities (Glasgow Caledonian and Northampton) and participants covered their own expenses. It is anticipated that these seminars will continue on this basis for the foreseeable future. The next one will be held at the University of East London in October.
The primary objectives of the seminar series were to develop an international network of critical social enterprise researchers and practitioners, to make critical research more accessible, and to engage practitioners and policy makers in the development of a future research agenda. We feel this has been achieved, evidenced in part by the continuance of the seminar series, also by some of the outputs listed under Exploitation routes, and finally be members of the co-investigators and some of the “core group” developing a bid to the ESRC to research the relationship between ideas(and ideologies) and social enterprise policies cross nationally (an idea which emerged from dialogue with practitioners and policy makers through the seminars).
Publications arising from the project
Dey, P., Steyaert, C. (eds.) (2015, forthcoming), Critical Perspectives of Social Entrepreneurship, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
Nicholls, A., (2014), Changing The Rules of The Game - The Politics of Social Entrepreneurship, Cheltenham UK Edward Elgar
And numerous journal articles and book chapters including:
Nicholls, A. (2014), The Politics of Social Entrepreneurship: A Comparative Research Framework, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship (forthcoming)
Nicholls, A. (2014), ‘The Paradigm Paradox of Social Entrepreneurship’, in Douglas, H., and Grant, S., Social Entrepreneurship and Enterprise: Concepts in Context, Melbourne University Press
Nicholls, A., and Dees, G. (2014), ‘Social Innovation’, The International Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioural Science, 2nd Edition, Elsevier
Nicholls, A., and Cho, A. (2013), ‘Social Entrepreneurship: The Structuration of a Field’, in Kickul, J., Gras, D., and Bacq, S. (eds.), in Social Entrepreneurship (The International Library of Entrepreneurship Series), Volume 1, Edward Elgar
Nicholls, Alex and Huybrechts, Benjamin (2013) The Role of Legitimacy in Social Enterprise-Corporate Collaboration. Social Enterprise Journal, 9 (2). pp. 130-146. Dey P., Steyaert, C. (2014, in press), ‘Rethinking the space of ethics in social entrepreneurship: Power, subjectivity, and practices of concrete freedom’, Journal of Business Ethics.
Dey, P., Teasdale, S. (2013), ‘‘Social enterprise’ and dis/identification: The politics of identity work in the UK third sector’, Administrative Theory and Praxis, 35 (2), 249-271
McKay, S., Moro, D., Teasdale, S., and Clifford, D. (2014) The marketization of charities in England and Wales, Voluntas, DOI 10.1007/s11266-013-9417-y
Seanor, P., Bull, M., and Baines, S (forthcoming) Where social enterprise practitioners draw the line: Towards an understanding of movement from social entrepreneurship as boundary work, International Journal of Public Sector Management
Teasdale, S., Lyon, F., and Baldock, R. (2013) Playing with numbers: A methodological critique of the social enterprise growth myth, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 4(2): 113-131
Nicholls, A., (2014), Changing The Rules of The Game - The Politics of Social Entrepreneurship, Cheltenham UK Edward Elgar
And numerous journal articles and book chapters including:
Nicholls, A. (2014), The Politics of Social Entrepreneurship: A Comparative Research Framework, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship (forthcoming)
Nicholls, A. (2014), ‘The Paradigm Paradox of Social Entrepreneurship’, in Douglas, H., and Grant, S., Social Entrepreneurship and Enterprise: Concepts in Context, Melbourne University Press
Nicholls, A., and Dees, G. (2014), ‘Social Innovation’, The International Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioural Science, 2nd Edition, Elsevier
Nicholls, A., and Cho, A. (2013), ‘Social Entrepreneurship: The Structuration of a Field’, in Kickul, J., Gras, D., and Bacq, S. (eds.), in Social Entrepreneurship (The International Library of Entrepreneurship Series), Volume 1, Edward Elgar
Nicholls, Alex and Huybrechts, Benjamin (2013) The Role of Legitimacy in Social Enterprise-Corporate Collaboration. Social Enterprise Journal, 9 (2). pp. 130-146. Dey P., Steyaert, C. (2014, in press), ‘Rethinking the space of ethics in social entrepreneurship: Power, subjectivity, and practices of concrete freedom’, Journal of Business Ethics.
Dey, P., Teasdale, S. (2013), ‘‘Social enterprise’ and dis/identification: The politics of identity work in the UK third sector’, Administrative Theory and Praxis, 35 (2), 249-271
McKay, S., Moro, D., Teasdale, S., and Clifford, D. (2014) The marketization of charities in England and Wales, Voluntas, DOI 10.1007/s11266-013-9417-y
Seanor, P., Bull, M., and Baines, S (forthcoming) Where social enterprise practitioners draw the line: Towards an understanding of movement from social entrepreneurship as boundary work, International Journal of Public Sector Management
Teasdale, S., Lyon, F., and Baldock, R. (2013) Playing with numbers: A methodological critique of the social enterprise growth myth, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 4(2): 113-131
Use in a public context
Without specific research findings it is difficult to outline the potential economic or societal impacts. We feel that the main contribution of the seminar series is its potential impact on policy and practice through the sharing of ideas between academics and practitioners. One potential impact from our seminar series centres upon raising awareness of the politics of social enterprise as a mechanism for public services delivery. This has fed into the National Coalition for Independent Action’s (NCIA) “Inquiry into the future of Voluntary Services”, from which the first reports are due shortly.
This sharing of ideas was extended to a wider audience through blogs and other forms of social media, in particular the widely read and critically acclaimed blog: Beanbags and Bullsh1t (http://beanbagsandbullsh1t.com/ ), and former cabinet minister Les Huckfield’s website (http://www.huckfield.com/ ). Both of these outlets helped “translate” some of the academic research presented at the seminar series into a more accessible format. For example, on November 21 2012 Beanbags and Bullshit reported on seminar 1and offered a measured critique of the NCIA (and some academics) position on social enterprise and public service delivery.
The seminar series also reached a wider audience when project partner David Floyd blogged about the myth of social enterprise growth (building upon his and Simon Teasdale’s contribution to seminar 2) on the Guardian’s social enterprise website. It remains to be seen what the societal and economic impacts will be, but the seminar series has certainly opened up debate on the role of social enterprise in public service delivery.
This sharing of ideas was extended to a wider audience through blogs and other forms of social media, in particular the widely read and critically acclaimed blog: Beanbags and Bullsh1t (http://beanbagsandbullsh1t.com/ ), and former cabinet minister Les Huckfield’s website (http://www.huckfield.com/ ). Both of these outlets helped “translate” some of the academic research presented at the seminar series into a more accessible format. For example, on November 21 2012 Beanbags and Bullshit reported on seminar 1and offered a measured critique of the NCIA (and some academics) position on social enterprise and public service delivery.
The seminar series also reached a wider audience when project partner David Floyd blogged about the myth of social enterprise growth (building upon his and Simon Teasdale’s contribution to seminar 2) on the Guardian’s social enterprise website. It remains to be seen what the societal and economic impacts will be, but the seminar series has certainly opened up debate on the role of social enterprise in public service delivery.