【作者】 李丹；

【导师】 井润田；

【作者基本信息】 电子科技大学 ， 工商管理， 2019， 博士

【摘要】 近年来,伴随着全球经济达到前所未有的高度,环境保护、老龄化、食品安全、弱势群体等社会问题却日益凸显,仅依靠政府、市场、或非营利组织的力量已无法有效解决。社会企业凭借着解决社会问题的创新方式在全球蓬勃发展,逐渐成为一种突破政府失灵、市场失灵、公益失灵,解决社会发展困局的创新思维和实践。社会企业的出现与风靡,不仅反映了全球社会在社会问题可持续解决方面所做的创新与努力,更代表了当前世界各国对传统资本主义利润最大化的反思和修正。目前,社会企业在中国发展迅速,未来几年有望呈现出突破式的增长。社会企业强调用商业化手段解决社会问题,实现商业企业和非营利组织的交汇与融合,代表了一种新的组织形态——“混合组织”。社会企业混合组织的本质特征是融合包括商业逻辑和社会公益逻辑在内的多种制度逻辑,具有混合特性。混合特性是一把双刃剑,在赋予社会企业资源和创新的同时,也给社会企业的运营和管理带来困难与挑战。因此,社会企业的出现和成长构成了组织理论研究中一个非常重要的研究“谜题”:“社会企业如何克服两种制度逻辑的差异与冲突,保持商业竞争力和社会价值创造力,实现可持续发展?”,也推动着“社会企业多元制度逻辑的管理和平衡”成为一个重要的研究课题。本研究立足于中国经济转型、社会创新和变革的背景,从多元制度逻辑理论视角切入,探索和研究三个问题:第一,中国转型经济背景下社会企业多元制度逻辑的分布特征与管理模式的构成维度是什么;第二,中国社会企业具有哪些优势,同时面临哪些冲突与张力;第三,中国社会企业如何克服冲突与张力,保持混合特性并实现可持续增长。为了探索和回答上述三个研究问题,本研究基于中国20家社会企业的调研与访谈,采取扎根研究、单案例研究的质性研究方法,试图揭开多元制度逻辑在社会企业内部共存与融合的“黑箱”。研究结论发现:(1)中国社会企业多元制度逻辑的分布特征与管理模式。首先,中国社会企业内部存在三种制度逻辑:社会公益逻辑、商业逻辑和政府逻辑,其中,商业逻辑和社会公益逻辑是社会企业的核心逻辑,决定了社会企业混合组织的本质特征,政府逻辑的介入会影响商业逻辑和社会公益逻辑。其次,社会企业多元制度逻辑的分布特征可以概括为:制度逻辑的重要性、制度逻辑的范围和制度逻辑的强度;其中,根据制度逻辑的范围,本研究把社会企业分为四类:“通用型社会企业”、“渠道型社会企业”、“聚焦型社会企业和“杠杆型社会企业”。第三,社会企业多元制度逻辑的管理模式构成维度有:组织架构、组织实践、组织人员和组织文化;其中,商业逻辑和社会公益逻辑在组织实践维度上的融合呈现出四种模式:受益人为消费者、受益人为内部员工、受益人为供应商、受益人为独立于社会企业之外的其他人。(2)中国社会企业具有的优势和面临的冲突与张力。首先,相比传统的非营利组织,中国社会企业在资源获取、合法性建立和工作认同等方面更具有优势。其次,多种制度逻辑的融合也导致社会企业面临冲突与张力,主要体现在:商业逻辑和社会公益逻辑的融合导致其面临的冲突与张力主要包括:资源张力、绩效平衡张力和认同张力;政府逻辑的介入带来的冲突与张力主要包括:宏观政策缺失、政府既创新又控制的模糊角色导致社会企业社会目标受损;政府逻辑可能会限制社会企业的某些市场化行为,过度的政府依赖可能弱化社会企业的商业思维与能力。(3)中国社会企业保持混合特性的两种关键机制为:组织实践的试错与创新、社会创业者的悖论式认知。社会企业通过组织实践的试错与创新,不断调整组织实践与组织身份来应对外部需求或张力;悖论式认知则提供了组织实践试错与创新的边界,保证社会企业实现社会和商业的双重目标,避免出现目标偏移。本研究具有以下理论贡献:首先,揭开了多元制度逻辑在社会企业内部共存与融合的“黑箱”;其次,以扎根理论研究方式系统的归纳和总结了社会企业面临的冲突与张力,特别是政府逻辑可能对社会公益逻辑和商业逻辑的影响;第三,从动态长期的过程视角,揭示了社会企业保持混合特性的两种关键机制。更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent years,the global economy has entered an unprecedentedly developing era.However,social problems such as environmental pollution,aging population and food safety are becoming increasingly prominent,making it difficult to have an effective solution solely relying on the government,the market,or the non-profit organization.Social enterprise,creative in addressing social problems,has gradually become an innovative thinking and practice that saves government failures,market failures,charity failures and that finds a way-out in the social dilemma.The emergence and popularity of social enterprise not only reflect the society’s innovation and efforts in sustainably solving social problems,but also represents the reflection and revision on the profit maximization opinion from traditional capitalism.At present,social enterprises in China are growing rapidly and are expected to have a breakthrough in the next few years.Emphasizing on the use of commercial means in solving social problems as well as combining commercial and non-profit forms,social enterprise is a representative of hybrid organization,a new organization form.The core feature of hybrid organization in a social enterprise is the hybridity,which is the integration of multiple institutional logics including commercial logic and social welfare logic.Being a double-edged sword,hybridity brings difficulties and challenges to the operation and management of social enterprises while endowing the society enterprises with resources and innovation.The emergence and growth of social enterprises put forward a vital research question in organizational theory study: how do social enterprises overcome the differences and conflicts between the two institutional logics,maintain business competitiveness and social value creativity,achieve sustainable development? Meanwhile,the development of social enterprises also promotes the management and balance of the multiple institutional logics in social enterprises to become an important research topic.In the context of economic transition and social innovation in China and from the perspective of multiple institutional logic theory,this study explores three questions: Firstly,what are the dimensions of multiple institutional logic’s distribution features and management modes in social enterprises under the background of China’s transitional economy? Secondly,what are the advantages as well as conflicts and tensions faced by Chinese social enterprises? Thirdly,how do Chinese social enterprises cope with conflicts and tensions and maintain hybrid in achieving sustainable growth.In order to answer the above three research questions,the study adopts qualitative research methods such as grounded theory and single case study.Based on the surveys and interviews of 20 social enterprises in China,the study tries to reveal the ‘Black box’ of multiple institutional logics coexisting and integrating in social enterprises.The study found out that:(1)The distribution features and management modes of multi-institutional logics in Chinese social enterprises.There are three institutional logics within Chinese social enterprises: social welfare logic,commercial logic and state logic.Among them,commercial logic and social welfare logic are the core logics of social enterprise,which determine the nature of hybrid organization in social enterprises,and the intervention of state logic may affect the commercial logic and social welfare logic.The distribution features of multi-institutional logics in social enterprises can be summarized as: the importance of institutional logics,the scope of institutional logics and the degree of institutional logics.According to the scope of institutional logics,the study classifies social enterprises into four types: general social enterprise,channel social enterprise,focus social enterprise and leverage social enterprise.The management modes of social enterprises’ multi-institutional logics have four dimensions: organizational structure,organizational practice,organizational personnel and organizational culture.In the dimension of organizational practice,the integration of commercial logics and social welfare logic appears to have four types: customer benefited,employee benefited,supplier benefited,and other than the social enterprise benefited.(2)The advantages as well as conflicts and tensions faced by Chinese social enterprises.Comparing with traditional non-profit organizations,Chinese social enterprises have advantages in terms of resource acquisition,legality establishment and job identification.However,the integration of multi-institutional logics brings about conflicts and tensions.The conflicts and tensions caused by commercial logic and social welfare logic include: resource tension,performance tension and identity tension.The conflicts and tensions caused by government logic intervention include: the lack of macro policies,the ambiguous roles of government being both innovative and restrictive ruin the realization of social enterprises’ social goals.Additionally,the government logic may restrict some of the enterprises’ market behavior,and over dependence on government may weaken business thinking and capability.(3)Trial and error and innovation in organizational practice as well as paradox framing of social entrepreneurs are two key mechanisms for social enterprises to maintain hybridity.Through trial and error and innovation in organizational practices,social enterprises constantly adjust their practices and organizational identity to reduce external demands or tensions.Paradox framing provides the boundary for trial and error in organizational practice,which ensures social enterprises to stick to the social objective as well as commercial objective and avoid mission drift.This study contributes to the theory in the following ways: Firstly,this study unveils the ‘Black box’ of multi-institutional logics coexisting and integrating within social enterprises.Secondly,this study systematically summarizes the conflicts and tensions faced by social enterprises based on the grounded theory.Finally,this study reveals the two key mechanisms for social enterprises to maintain hybridity from a dynamic and long-term perspective.更多还原