RESPONSIBLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP VISION DEVELOPMENT AND ETHICS

382 RESPONSIBLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Drivers and barriers to responsible entrepreneurship
In line with the previous arguments, as social responsibility investment is increasing, managers
are more than ever concerned with making decisions that promote societal welfare and
reduce the negative impact on the environment that organization procedures and processes
might have (Lindgreen & Swaen, 2010). Companies receive incentives from the government
via policies and legislation as the latest aims to supplement its efforts Furthermore, businesses
are adopting responsible behaviour as a consequence of legal regulations that are becoming
more society and environmentally concerned. Apart from attempting to avoid conflicts with
the law, organizations adopt responsible conduct to satisfy their customers who are more eager
to purchase products or services from responsible businesses (ethical consumerism) and the
general public. Also, employees nowadays are more willing to work for companies with strong
values and their performance is significantly affected by that (Vogel, 2008).
The main obstacle that organizations face when trying to adopt responsible conduct is the
lack of financial resources (especially for start-ups). This issue is included under the cost and
benefit ratio which also encompasses the trade-offs that might occur when pursuing profit
and ethical behaviour at the same given time (Laudal, 2011). Furthermore, the company might
lack internal control, which involves management’s constant engagement to the internalization
of responsible conduct throughout all levels within the business. Finally, the organization
might lack external control, which encompasses the lack of knowledge with respect to
the implementation of responsible entrepreneurship as well as the lack of ability to control
the market environment (Doane, 2005). Finally, one of the core uncertainty elements and barriers
towards implementing proper responsible entrepreneurship resides in the lack of proper
cohesion of the quintuple helix actors in social ecosystems – which often lack the necessary
co-creation and common vision.
From a triple helix ecosystem to a quadruple and then quintuple helix ecosystem
The triple helix model was thoroughly delimitated by Henry Etzkowitz and later on, developed
by Leydesdorff. This model illustrates the government relations, industry and university,
which are core pillars to a knowledge society (Hohmann, 2016; Viale & Ghiglione 1998).
In other words, innovation and knowledge will be combined with these three aspects. This
model focuses on the interaction among institutions with the industry and the government in
order to create proper growth strategies for businesses (Etzkowitz & Ranga, 2010). For
instance, industry, which is the one of the sections of this model needs the government in
order to ensure proper exchange and interactions among the other industries (Stanford University,
2016). Moreover, university is also a core element to the success of an industry as
the industry will use the technology and the innovations that are development by the institutions.
Also, employees that work in the industries are graduating from the academic institution,
which bring the success to the businesses – becoming thus pertinent to have a clear goal
alignment among these three actors (Stanford University, 2016).
Due to many changes that are occurring (economic, cultural, etc.), the triple helix model
required an extension towards the consideration of civil society (Marcovich & Shinn, 2011).
This model includes the society in the development of knowledge within the environment in
order to properly address social challenges. For example, by doing so, the Women Resource
Centres used the quadruple helix model in order to increase gender equality within the indus-