The process of organizational identification in social enterprises: The role of coalitions

• Published date: 01 December 2023
• Author: Cécile Godfroid,Marc Labie
• Date: 01 December 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12551

THEORETICAL ARTICLE

The process of organizational identification in social enterprises:

The role of coalitions

Cécile Godfroid | Marc Labie

UMONS –CERMI –Chair in Social

Economy, Mons, Belgium

Correspondence

Cécile Godfroid, UMONS –CERMI –Chair in

Social Economy, Place Warcoqué, 17, 7000

Mons, Belgium.

Email: cecile.godfroid@umons.ac.be

Abstract

This paper offers a detailed and systemic representation of the process of organi-

zational identification in social enterprises, and a better understanding of how

individuals position themselves in these organizations. We highlight that identifi-

cation in social enterprises is the result of the interplay between the multiple iden-

tities of the individuals who take part in coalitions defending different

institutional logics. Identification will depend on whether or not it is easy for the

individual to find a coalition that corresponds to him or her, and on whether or

not the ideas of this coalition are dominant. The relative size of the various coali-

tions among the staff and the way they evolve will have a clear impact on what

the dominant logic of the social enterprise will be.

KEYWORDS

coalition, multilevel approach, organizational identification, social enterprise, systemic approach

JEL CLASSIFICATION

D23, O15

INTRODUCTION

Social enterprises have recently emerged as a way to

address multifaceted global issues such as poverty, global

warming, education, or public health (Jay, 2013) and

have gradually attracted more and more attention from

the media, governments, investors, and academic

scholars (Battilana & Lee, 2014; Mair et al., 2015). This

organizational form seems to be particularly adapted to

the increasing complexity of the environment in which

organizations operate because it includes “elements pre-

scribed by various logics and [is] therefore likely to pro-

ject at least partial appropriateness to a wide set of

institutional referents”(Pache & Santos, 2013: 973).

As such, social enterprises can be considered as being

part of a long tradition of what is nowadays called

“hybrid organizations”which include many cooperatives

and organizations that are associated with the third sec-

tor. Indeed, third sector organizations are considered as

such because they often deal with needs and provide

goods or services that are somehow between pure private

profit-driven sector, being delivered in a true commercial

way, and public sector, dealing with social and common

goods considerations. However, there is a major nuance

that is included in the social enterprise term. In most

third sector organizations, it is the social dimension that

dominates, the economic break-even objective is more of

a constraint to be met than a true objective, justifying

therefore often the needs or at least the search for subsi-

dies. On the contrary, in social enterprises, both

aspects—economic and social—are really considered at

the same level.

Social enterprises are thus defined as organizations

that “pursue a social mission while engaging in commer-

cial activities that sustain their operations”(Battilana &

Lee, 2014: 399; Mair & Marti, 2006; Santos, 2012). They

are thus composed of “two or more types that would not

normally be expected to go together”(Albert &

Whetten, 1985: 270), of several institutional logics and/or

several identities, and “do not fit neatly into established

categories of organizational forms, sectors or institu-

tional domains”(Mair et al., 2015: 714; Powell, 1987).

Although adopting a hybrid organizational form may

present some advantages, numerous scholars highlight

the different challenges social enterprises have to face

because of external and internal tensions, as they are “by

nature arenas of contradiction”(Pache & Santos, 2013:

972).

DOI: 10.1111/emre.12551

European Management Review. 2023;20:783–793. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/emre © 2023 European Academy of Management (EURAM). 783