STREAM 9
Hybrid organizations and hybridity: implications for social entrepreneurship research and beyond

Chairs:  Giacomo Ciambotti (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore), Fernando Romero (University of Minho)

Description:
Social enterprises and social innovation practices typically involve a combination of commercial and social goals, processes and models (Doherty et al. 2014; Battilana & Lee, 2014). Most of the research has focused on the tensions between social and commercial mission (Smith and Besharov, 2019; Besharov et al. 2019), and investigates how hybridity can be a source of opportunities toward addressing social and environmental problems and grand challenges (Saebi et al. 2019; Ciambotti & Pedrini, 2021). At a time of growing research in this area, this conference stream will explore social entrepreneurship and social innovation in the context of hybrid organisations. Hybridity is also found to be breaking down some of the boundaries between sectors, professions and disciplines. It is the bringing together of different goals, processes, means, approaches, norms and logics that defines hybridity (Smith & Besharov, 2019). 
In particular, this call for papers involves three directions of research around hybrid organizations, calling for implication, contribution, and contextualization of hybridity for social entrepreneurship and social innovation.

​

1. IMPLICATIONS OF HYBRIDITY: Hybrid organizing has relevant implications throughout the organization, shaping models, behaviours and strategies (Battilana & Lee, 2014), with research now needed on how it shapes different stages of an enterprise and different parts of the operations. There are specific issues facing start-ups and those in the early stages, and in relation to opportunity recognition and exploitation (Wry & York, 2017). Also, business models have been demonstrated as useful lens in hybridity (Davies & Doherty, 2019), but more research is required to investigate challenges and opportunities in business model design and innovation in relation with hybridity toward addressing grand challenges and complex problems. There is a need for more understanding of marketing issues, human resource management and innovation strategy that involves the interplay of different missions, processes and goals. Finally, we would welcome works which expand research on growth and scaling strategies of social entrepreneurship and hybrid organisations to develop greater theories on how they contribute to societal and environmental impact (Smith & Besharov, 2019; Shepherd & Patzelt, 2020).​

2. CONTRIBUTION OF HYBRIDITY: Given the recent literature reviews on this topic (Battilana et al. 2017; Besharov et al. 2019), there is much to learn about how hybridity is emerging and manifesting in social entrepreneurship, expanding the nature, challenges and outcomes of hybridity, such as mission drift (Grimes et al. 2019) or the identity-based dynamics of hybrid/social entrepreneurs (Wry & York, 2017). Also, research in social enterprises as hybrids has to deepen the understanding on how hybrids can creatively build, grow and develop solutions to tackle some of the global challenges such as food system restoration, climate change, gender inequality, decent work, and the overall SDGs etc. Papers which investigate such outcomes as social development, inclusive growth, community transformation, social change etc. are very important for this stream. How hybridity drives, impacts, and changes the social entrepreneurial processes to pursue social change is still under exploration (Saebi et al., 2019). For instance, hybridity may offer new insights on the processes and outcomes of inclusive entrepreneurship e.g. concerning marginalized women entrepreneurs, vulnerable actors, underdog and barefoot entrepreneurs etc. (Bakker and McMullen, 2023). 

3. CONTEXTUALIZATION OF HYBRIDITY: Third, future studies need to better explore variations of hybrid organisations and models across different contexts, especially those that have had less involvement in social enterprise research, particularly those in developing countries. In this sense, scholars are calling to a “decolonization” of research in the global south (Hamann et al. 2020; Morris et al. 2023). For this reason, we call for research which investigate hybridity and social entrepreneurship in developed and developing countries, such as Africa (Ciambotti et al. 2020), or hybridity and contextual challenges such as Covid-19 (Bacq & Lumpkin, 2020), or hybridity at different levels of analysis (micro, meso, and macro-level) (Saebi et al. 2019). For instance, research is needed to understand how social entrepreneurship under the light of hybridity may contribute toward systemic change and civic wealth creation (Lumpkin and Bacq, 2019; Sottini et al. forthcoming) or addressing institutional voids in developing contexts (Sydow et al., 2020). Also, research which investigates variations in forms of hybrids as social enterprises, B Corps, or other organizational forms as cross-sectoral partnership require much more exploration and development.

This stream is thus for theoretical and practical research which focus on any element of hybrid organizations and social entrepreneurship research (and not exhaustive) including:​

• How hybrid organizations tackle global challenges and SDGs (models, strategies, processes…)

• Identity of hybrid organisations and social enterprises

• Hybrid organisational forms (social enterprises, B Corp, benefit corporations, etc.)

• Management of conflicting goals, means and processes, and risk of mission drifts

• Opportunity recognition/exploitation that combines social and commercial missions

• Strategies of hybrid organisations and social enterprises

• Growth and scaling drivers, processes and outcomes in hybrid organisations

• Capabilities, skills and knowledge required within of hybrid organisations 

• Internal organization of marketing, HR, etc. oriented to social and environmental value creation 

• Hybridity and contextual challenges (e.g. Covid-19, economic crisis etc.)

• Hybrid organisations, communities and local contexts

• Hybrid organisations and systemic change/civic wealth creation

• Hybrid organisations and the institutional context

• Hybrid organisations and social/environmental impacts in developed and developing countries

• International and cultural differences in hybrid models 

• Hybrids involving cultural objectives 

• Dark sides of hybridity in social entrepreneurship

​

References:
Bacq, S., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2020). Social Entrepreneurship and COVID‐19. Journal of Management Studies.

Battilana, J., Besharov, M., & Mitzinneck, B. (2017). On hybrids and hybrid organizing: A review and roadmap for future research. The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism, 2, 133-169.
Besharov, M., Smith, W., & Darabi, T. (2019). A framework for sustaining hybridity in social enterprises: combining differentiating and integrating. In Handbook of Inclusive Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ciambotti, G., & Pedrini, M. (2021). Hybrid harvesting strategies to overcome resource constraints: Evidence from social enterprises in Kenya. Journal of Business Ethics, 168(3), 631-650.
Ciambotti, G., Littlewood, D., Sottini, A., & M’ithiria, E. N. (2020). Building and scaling social enterprise business models for BOP markets in Kenya. In Base of the Pyramid Markets in Africa (pp. 199-227). Routledge.
Davies, I. A., & Doherty, B. (2019). Balancing a hybrid business model: The search for equilibrium at Cafédirect. Journal of Business Ethics, 157(4), 1043-1066.
Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organisations: A review and research agenda. International journal of management reviews, 16(4), 417-436.
Grimes, M. G., Williams, T. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2019). Anchors aweigh: The sources, variety, and challenges of mission drift. Academy of Management Review, 44(4), 819-845.
Lumpkin, G. T., & Bacq, S. (2019). Civic wealth creation: A new view of stakeholder engagement and societal impact. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(4), 383-404.
Shepherd, D. A., & Patzelt, H. (2020). A Call for Research on the Scaling of Organisations and the Scaling of Social Impact.
Smith, W. K., & Besharov, M. L. (2019). Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 1-44.
Sottini, A., Ciambotti, G., & Littlewood, D. (forthcoming). Engaging symbiotic ecosystems to build community centred business models for the BoP: Evidence from small social enterprises in East Africa. International Small Business Journal. Forthcoming.
Sydow, A., Cannatelli, B. L., Giudici, A., & Molteni, M. (2020). Entrepreneurial workaround practices in severe institutional voids: Evidence from Kenya. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 1042258720929891. 
Wolf, M., & Mair, J. (2019). Purpose, commitment and coordination around small wins: A proactive approach to governance in integrated hybrid organisations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 30(3), 535-548.
Wry, T., & York, J. G. (2017). An identity-based approach to social enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 437-460.
Bakker, R. M., & McMullen, J. S. (2023). Inclusive entrepreneurship: A call for a shared theoretical conversation about unconventional entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 38(1), 106268.
Morris, S., Aguilera, R. V., Fisher, G., & Thatcher, S. M. (2023). Theorizing From Emerging Markets: Challenges, Opportunities, and Publishing Advice. Academy of Management Review, 48(1), 1-10.
Hamann, R., Luiz, J., Ramaboa, K., Khan, F., Dhlamini, X., & Nilsson, W. (2020). Neither colony nor enclave: Calling for dialogical contextualism in management and organization studies. Organization Theory, 1(1), online first.

​