Corporate social entrepreneurship

CSE is a multi-disciplinary scientific sub-field relating to the fields of corporate social responsibility and sustainability. It has relevance in the context of business and management, specifically in areas such as business ethics, sustainability, organizational behavior, entrepreneurship, human resource management and business strategy. The concept has intersections with sociology, anthropology, social psychology and philosophy. The social entrepreneurship literature has largely concentrated on the voluntary, not-for-profit, or "third" sector. In the for-profit context, the social entrepreneur is traditionally perceived as a philanthropic agent or business owner. In the UK, the corporation is defined by the company’s directors and shareholders in its articles of association, requiring employees to deliver returns to shareholders, through their job roles. The exception to this might be the UK’s Co-operative Group, which describes its business as guided by a social mission and is not responsible to shareholders for delivering profit. CSE is unlikely to have the time or other resources to commit full-scale due to organizational constraints. Hence, corporate social entrepreneurship is characterized by its informality. The entrepreneurial discretion that is required to perform it is controversial. Activity done by CSEs varied across the domains of CSR. ==Background==

CSE was initially described in 2002 in a theoretical working paper published in the Hull University Business School Research Memoranda Series. The paper argued that personal values could also motivate CSR (and sustainability), along with more apparent economic and macro-political drivers. This reflected traditional business ethics and the philosophical debate on moral agency. The paper was then followed by a UK conference paper, published the following year in the Journal of Business Ethics, which discussed the significance of managerial discretion in CSR. The term "corporate social entrepreneur" was first used in a paper presented during the 17th Annual European Business Ethics Network Conference held in June 2004. The term "corporate social entrepreneur" was defined and distinguished from other types of entrepreneurs, such as executive entrepreneurs, intrapreneurs (Pinchot, 1985), policy entrepreneurs, and public or social entrepreneur. ==Business ethics==

Embezzlement of social entrepreneurial funds is not unheard of, nor are generally unethical business practices being covered up by robust social entrepreneurial programs. Many businesses conduct social entrepreneurship for the sake of public relations. Social corporate entrepreneurship activity has yet to be quantified on any objective scale. There is some evidence that supports the idea that businesses that are ethical, as reported by their employees, are performing better than those that are not. This evidence is joined by other evidence which suggests that employees tend to leave companies that they do not view as behaving ethically. CSE has been described as a manifestation of enlightened self-interest. Alternatively, a deontological viewpoint frames acts of socially responsible behavior as driven by the individual's sense of duty to society, which may be viewed in terms of altruism. ==Research==

Summers and Dyck (2011) described the abstract stages of CSE as: first socialization, or the conception of a socially beneficial idea. Second externalization, developing the idea into a concrete plan. Third integration, making the idea a reality. Finally, fourth is internalization, or establishing socially beneficial practices in the company. Some studies have shown a positive relationship between CSR and financial performance, others regard the picture as more nuanced. Consequently, the notion of the corporate social entrepreneur is controversial due to arguments about the role of business and whether or not CSR helps financial performance, and because the concept of employee discretion has been considered a key factor in moral character (in the ancient philosophical sense). Some unethical behavior is sometimes acknowledged as an outcome of discretion and agency; corporate irresponsibility is regarded as insufficient. This was relevant during the 2008 financial crisis, which was exacerbated by financial irregularities and lapses in corporate governance. These have produced some calls to move beyond capitalism. Individuals closely related between the financial objectives of a company and public well-being sometimes referred to as Social Intraprenuers. Hemingway (2013) referred to the synonymous nature of the two terms: intrapreneur (Pinchot, 1985) and corporate entrepreneur. The value system that is employed within an organization plays a large role in the emergence of corporate social entrepreneurs. Moreover, the sustainability of social intrapreneurship ventures has been called into question by critics. Socially beneficial ventures often struggles in the short term, leading to hesitance from investors. ==See also==