05.02.2013 Views

13th Annual International Management Conference Proceeding

13th Annual International Management Conference Proceeding

13th Annual International Management Conference Proceeding

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

experience empathy is a social entrepreneur. This implies that empathy is necessary but not sufficient<br />

condition in the SE process. A certain level of empathy is needed in order to trigger perceived social venture<br />

desirability, which in turn will lead to intentions to create a social venture.<br />

Moral judgment represents an additional concept that is frequently employed to explain helping responses<br />

(Comunian &Gielen, 1995). Under the assumption that moral norms regulate the actions of individuals,<br />

Lopez, Apodaka et al.(1994) define moral judgment as the reasoning an individual follows to justify his/her<br />

actions in the face of moral dilemma. For the purpose of this research moral judgment was defined as the<br />

cognitive process that motivates an individual to help others in search of a common good.<br />

Kohlberg and Hersh (1977) claim that, moral judgment develops in human cognition through a sequential<br />

series of six stages, which increasingly demonstrate a higher capacity for empathy and justice. The most basic<br />

form of moral judgment is when individuals consider the goodness or badness of actions depending on their<br />

physical consequences regardless of their human meaning or value (punishment-and-obedience orientation).<br />

As an individual educates his/her moral judgment, he/she passes through more sophisticated stages of moral<br />

reasoning until reaching the sixth stage (the universal-ethical-principle orientation), the most developed form<br />

of moral judgment.<br />

Individuals moral judgment is affected by exposure to social experiences that make an individual deal with<br />

the needs, values, and viewpoints of others (Comunian &Gielen.1995); perceived magnitude of the<br />

consequences (i.e. the perceived harm or good done to an individual) and the social consensus (the level of<br />

agreement on the goodness or evil of a proposed act) (Morris & McDonald, 1995).<br />

Prabhu (1999) found that social entrepreneurs are motivated by a need to be loyal to their own principles,<br />

and to socially responsible. Johnson (2000) claims that; social entrepreneurs crave for social justice and I<br />

propose that this can only be achieved if social capital is prevalent in the community social entrepreneurs<br />

intend to establish a social enterprise.<br />

2.2 Relationship between cognitive & emotional characteristics and social capital<br />

In organizations like the Grameen Bank, we may well find examples of what Sfeir-Younis (2002) calls<br />

“spiritual entrepreneurship”: a paradigmatic shift away from traditional entrepreneurship expressed in the<br />

form of a personal challenge: “How can I encourage everyone associated with this enterprise to work from<br />

the highest possible level of awareness?” (p. 44). Such a vision entails profound commitments to ethics in the<br />

treatment of others (including competitors), the linkage of the organization to the idea of a self-realization,<br />

and constant reflection on the contribution of the organization to society. Although coming out of a United<br />

Nations agency context, Sfeir-Younis argues for the application of this term and model to the private sector<br />

as well. All commentators on social entrepreneurs agree that exceptional personal characteristics, usually held<br />

by a single person though sometimes manifested by a group, are not only helpful but essential to success.<br />

Waddock and Post (1991) argue that significant personal credibility is a key to the social entrepreneur's<br />

work and to her ability to enlist the commitments of others. Like the term “strategic philanthropy”, “social<br />

entrepreneurship” is an articulation (Hall, 1986; Slack, 1996), a combination of two concepts that do not<br />

naturally fit together and yet which seeks acceptance as common sense. It is the lack of a natural fit that<br />

renders the term open to resistance and challenge. Challenges, implicit or explicit, range from different<br />

interpretations of how the terms might justifiably be joined to denial that they should be used together at all.<br />

If the colonization of the social and public sectors by the language of business is accepted, the breakdown of<br />

barriers between the sectors becomes normalized. However, the terms cited are in contrast to the distinction<br />

made by Thompson (2002) between entrepreneurs who create social or artistic capital rather than financial<br />

capital, with social capital referring to that which is valuable to communities (p. 413). The concept of social<br />

capital, without a financial element, also emerges in descriptions of social entrepreneurs, with examples that<br />

include the Crimean War nurse, Florence Nightingale (Bornstein 2004).<br />

An extract from a speech by UK Prime Minister Tony Blair in January 1999) emphasizes the role of social<br />

capital in fostering social entrepreneurship.<br />

62

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!