The balancing act of social enterprise: An IT emergence perspective

Abstract The significance of IT in the context of non-digital social enterprises (SEs) and its influence on the viability of such SEs have been less studied themes in information systems research. In the era of ubiquitous IT, SEs have increasing pressures to cope with the ever-dynamic technological domain while balancing their dual objectives. Data from a single revelatory case of Jaipur Rugs (JR), an SE situated in a developing country context (India), is used to fathom the peculiarities of the SE context with a focus on the sociomaterial phenomena of IT emergence. Using the three fundamental notions of sociomateriality theory (relationality, performativity, and practice) this interpretive study understands the mechanisms underlying the SE’s attempt to balance its financial and social sustainability objectives. Through the innovative use of IT, the SE establishes and maintains shared value, yielding stability and efficiency to the business (financial viability) while simultaneously ensuring scalability and effectiveness of their social impact. This study strengthens the perspective of IT as an emergent phenomenon situated in sociomaterial practices and fills a gap in organizational literature by examining such phenomenon in the rich context of SEs where achieving the balance between dual goals is increasingly dependent on non-human (IT) agents.

[1]  Julien Jeandesboz,et al.  Questioning security devices: Performativity, resistance, politics , 2015 .

[2]  J. Battilana,et al.  Organizing for Society: A Typology of Social Entrepreneuring Models , 2012 .

[3]  R. Jeffery,et al.  Measuring Disability in India , 2008 .

[4]  Gianluca Miscione,et al.  Relationality in Geo-Information value. Price as product of socio-technical networks , 2010, Int. J. Spatial Data Infrastructures Res..

[5]  J. Barney,et al.  What Are Microfoundations? , 2013 .

[6]  Pernille Smith,et al.  Symbiosis across institutional logics in a social enterprise , 2016 .

[7]  Raymond Dart,et al.  The legitimacy of social enterprise , 2004 .

[8]  Michael S. Gordon How Social Enterprises Change: The Perspective of the Evolution of Technology , 2016 .

[9]  Øystein Sæbø,et al.  A holistic perspective on the theoretical foundations for ICT4D research , 2018, Inf. Technol. Dev..

[10]  Lisa J. Servon,et al.  Consumer Financial Literacy and the Impact of Online Banking on the Financial Behavior of Lower‐Income Bank Customers , 2008 .

[11]  Matti Mäntymäki,et al.  Enterprise social networking: A knowledge management perspective , 2016, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[12]  Zakaria Maamar,et al.  An Architecture and Guiding Framework for the Social Enterprise , 2015, IEEE Internet Computing.

[13]  N. Chiadamrong,et al.  Examining Capabilities of Social Entrepreneurship for Shared Value Creation , 2020, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship.

[14]  W. Orlikowski Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work , 2007 .

[15]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[16]  Robert Cooper,et al.  Peripheral Vision , 2005 .

[17]  Christopher Low A framework for the governance of social enterprise , 2006 .

[18]  N. Cornelius,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility and the Social Enterprise , 2008 .

[19]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[20]  Shiu‐Wan Hung,et al.  In pursuit of goodwill? The cross-level effects of social enterprise consumer behaviours , 2020 .

[21]  WalshamGeoff,et al.  A doxa-informed practice analysis , 2015 .

[22]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technology and Institutions: What Can Research on Information Technology and Research on Organizations Learn from Each Other? , 2001, MIS Q..

[23]  Susan V. Scott,et al.  10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization , 2008 .

[24]  Kai Riemer,et al.  Clarifying Ontological Inseparabiilty with Heidegger's Analysis of Equipment , 2017, MIS Q..

[25]  Alexander Moltubakk Kempton The Digital is Different: a Realist Reinterpretation of Sociomateriality , 2019, ECIS.

[26]  Will Venters,et al.  A Trichordal Temporal Approach to Digital Coordination: The Sociomaterial Mangling of the CERN Grid , 2014, MIS Q..

[27]  W. Orlikowski The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations , 2014 .

[28]  Stefan Haefliger,et al.  When decision support systems fail: Insights for strategic information systems from Formula 1 , 2018, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Paul M. Leonardi,et al.  Theoretical foundations for the study of sociomateriality , 2013, Inf. Organ..

[30]  Karen Barad Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning , 2007 .

[31]  W. Orlikowski The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in management research , 2010 .

[32]  S. Gherardi Introduction: The Critical Power of the `Practice Lens' , 2009 .

[33]  A. Rashid Inclusive Capitalism and Development: Case Studies of Telecenters Fostering Inclusion Through ICTs in Bangladesh , 2017 .

[34]  Silvia Masiero,et al.  Exploring Hybridity in Digital Social Entrepreneurship , 2019, ICT4D.

[35]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[36]  Yasmin Merali,et al.  The Broader Context for ICT4D Projects: A Morphogenetic Analysis , 2013, MIS Q..

[37]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  A doxa‐informed practice analysis: reflexivity and representations, technology and action , 2015, Inf. Syst. J..

[38]  Bengisu Tulu,et al.  A Theory of Organization-EHR Affordance Actualization , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Sebastian K. Boell,et al.  Conceptualizing Information Systems: from 'Input-Processing-output' Devices to Sociomaterial Apparatuses , 2012, ECIS.

[40]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Affordance potency: Explaining the actualization of technology affordances , 2017, Inf. Organ..

[41]  Bob Doherty,et al.  The diverse world of social enterprise: a collection of social enterprise stories , 2006 .

[42]  D. Bryde,et al.  From Stakeholders to Institutions: The Changing Face of Social Enterprise Governance Theory , 2007 .

[43]  Terri L. Griffith,et al.  Information Technology and the Changing Fabric of Organization , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[44]  J OrlikowskiWanda,et al.  Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory , 2011 .

[45]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Deriving an ICT4D research agenda: a commentary on ‘Information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D): solutions seeking problems?’ , 2012, J. Inf. Technol..

[46]  Mohammad Hossein Jarrahi,et al.  Agency, sociomateriality, and configuration work , 2018, Inf. Soc..

[47]  John Mingers,et al.  Critical realism and information systems: brief responses to Monod and Klein , 2004, Inf. Organ..

[48]  A. Sahay,et al.  Social enterprises in the Indian context: conceptualizing through qualitative lens , 2018 .

[49]  Andrew Burton-Jones,et al.  How Can We Develop Contextualized Theories of Effective Use? A Demonstration in the Context of Community-Care Electronic Health Records , 2017, Inf. Syst. Res..

[50]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Exploration of Healthcare Information System Users' lifeworld: an Empirical Study Informed by Heidegger's phenomenology , 2017, ECIS.

[51]  Rajiv Sabherwal,et al.  The Dynamics of Alignment: Insights from a Punctuated Equilibrium Model , 2001 .

[52]  E.G.J. Vosselman,et al.  The performativity of a management accounting and control system: Exploring the dynamic relational consequences of a design , 2019 .

[53]  G. Symon,et al.  The Sociomaterial Negotiation of Social Entrepreneurs’ Meaningful Work , 2018, Journal of Management Studies.

[54]  Suprateek Sarker,et al.  The Role of Affordances in the Deinstitutionalization of a Dysfunctional Health Management Information System in Kenya: An Identity Work Perspective , 2019, MIS Q..

[55]  MntymkiMatti,et al.  Enterprise social networking , 2016 .

[56]  Franziska Günzel-Jensen,et al.  Balancing dual missions for social venture growth: a comparative case study , 2018, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development.

[57]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Improvising Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change Perspective , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[58]  Dave Elder-Vass Material Parts in Social Structures , 2017 .

[59]  Ana Moreno-Romero,et al.  THE ROLE OF ICT IN SCALING UP THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL ENTERPRISES , 2013 .

[60]  Yvonne Ac Loh Approaches to ICT for development (ICT4D): vulnerabilities vs. capabilities , 2015 .

[61]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  A Practice Perspective on Technology-Mediated Network Relations: The Use of Internet-Based Self-Serve Technologies , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[62]  Angela Lin,et al.  Structuring Information Systems-in-Use: Studying the Replication of an E-Procurement System through a Practice Lens , 2013, J. Glob. Inf. Manag..

[63]  R. Kanter,et al.  From spare change to real change. The social sector as beta site for business innovation. , 1999, Harvard business review.

[64]  Niels Bjørn-Andersen,et al.  Exploring Value Cocreation in Relationships Between an ERP Vendor and its Partners: A Revelatory Case Study , 2012, MIS Q..

[65]  B. Slife Taking Practice Seriously: Toward a Relational Ontology. , 2004 .

[66]  M. N. Ravishankar,et al.  Social innovations in outsourcing: An empirical investigation of impact sourcing companies in India , 2015, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[67]  Cheryl A. Dorsey,et al.  In Search of the Hybrid Ideal , 2012 .

[68]  Yujong Hwang,et al.  Effects of information technology on corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from an emerging economy , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[69]  N. Kabeer,et al.  Gender equality and women's empowerment: A critical analysis of the third millennium development goal 1 , 2005 .

[70]  Aldona Fr¹czkiewicz-Wronka,et al.  THE USE OF ICT FOR ACHIEVING THE OBJECTIVES OF THE BUSINESS MODEL – SOCIAL ENTERPRISE PERSPECTIVE , 2014 .

[71]  Matthew Jones,et al.  A Matter of Life and Death: Exploring Conceptualizations of Sociomateriality in the Context of Critical Care , 2014, MIS Q..

[72]  Susan V. Scott,et al.  Exploring Material‐Discursive Practices , 2015 .

[73]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Entanglements in Practice: Performing Anonymity Through Social Media , 2014, MIS Q..

[74]  P. Phelan,et al.  The ontology of performance: representation without reproduction , 2003 .

[75]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[76]  Karen Barad Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter , 2003, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society.

[77]  Marko Niemimaa,et al.  Information systems security policy implementation in practice: from best practices to situated practices , 2017, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[78]  Joyce M. Rothschild Workers' Cooperatives and Social Enterprise , 2009 .

[79]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[80]  Stéphanie Missonier,et al.  Stakeholder analysis and engagement in projects: From stakeholder relational perspective to stakeholder relational ontology , 2014 .

[81]  Fawzi Halila,et al.  Journey and impact of business model innovation : The case of a social enterprise in the Scandinavian electricity retail market , 2018 .

[82]  T. Schatzki Peripheral Vision , 2005 .

[83]  Kristi Yuthas,et al.  Mission impossible: diffusion and drift in the microfinance industry , 2010 .