Social enterprises – hybrid organizations that combine seemingly incompatible social mission and commercial logics – can generate novel solutions to pressing social problems. Yet sustaining these dual logics in one organization over time remains challenging. Drawing on paradox research, the authors argue that organizations can effectively do so by combining features that both differentiate and integrate logics. Differentiating involves organizational features that encourage distinctions and separations across logics, while integrating involves features that encourage synergies. The authors show how dual logics can be differentiated and integrated at the individual, group, and organizational levels. Using examples from recent social enterprise research, they build a framework for sustaining hybridity in social enterprises that illustrates the value of adopting features that both differentiate logics and integrate logics, and highlights varied configurations for doing so. Based on this analysis, they propose a research agenda for exploring in greater depth how differentiating and integrating can sustain social enterprises and support social innovation and hybridity more broadly.
Marya Besharov, Wendy Smith and Tiffany Darabi
Miguel Pina e Cunha, Marianne Lewis, Arménio Rego and Wendy K. Smith
The chapter discusses the role of biographical methods in leadership research. Biographical methods refer to a variety of approaches that include self-narratives, autobiographies, and historical biographies. The authors explore an individual’s life story to elucidate its dynamics over time. Biographical methods engage with the lived experience of leadership and aim to explore the richness of the experience of leading. They aim to generate deep-level and holistic insights into the behaviors, relationships, thoughts, and emotions of leaders, and help to make sense of how such behaviors, relationships, thoughts, and emotions dynamically unfold over time and in context. Biographical methods provide a rich combination of breadth (the dimensions across a leader’s life) and depth (the intimate details about the leader’s life and circumstances over time). Such combination of breadth and depth favors the creation of insight into factors often excluded from leadership research, namely the paradoxical tensions and inconsistencies inherent in leadership processes.