A literature review on Social entrepreneurship in higher education

Info: 4834 words Sample Literature Review
Published: 22th SEPTEMBER 2023

Tagged: Biology & Lifescience

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• LinkedIn  
• Whatsapp 

Abstract

The introduction of social entrepreneurship (S.E.) in universities aims to nurture future social entrepreneurs. S.E. courses, combining local community and industry cooperation, can effectively address social problems. However, challenges such as research design, curriculum design, financial and funding issues, lack of professionals, and prohibitive social and university environment issues have delayed the development of successful S.E. programs. The research suggests best practices such as increased S.E. awareness programs, university management in funding solutions, preparation of S.E. coaching professionals, and university-industry collaborations. The paper proposes leveraging the social network as an innovative technological alternative for improved social benefits.

Introduction

Social entrepreneurship (S.E.) is described as a process that involves the creative use and combination of resources in order to seek chances to catalyze social change or meet social needs (Mair & Mart, 2006). S.E., according to researchers, has the potential to reduce social problems such as poverty and homelessness, the needs of underprivileged children (Capella-Peris, Gil-Gómez, Mart-Puig, & RuzBernardo, 2020), unemployment (Adnan, Yusoff, & Ghazali, 2018), racial discrimination, denied access to education, and increased criminal activity (Kerbo & Coleman, 2006). S.E. and traditional entrepreneurship can be distinguished in numerous ways (Mokhtar, Abdullah, & Kin, 2014). Traditional entrepreneurship is concerned with maximizing profits and contributing to economic growth by creating job opportunities (Apostolakis, 2011; Wahid, Hussain, & Ayob, 2018), whereas S.E. is concerned with making the world a better place by reducing social problems (Litzky, Godshalk, & Walton-Bongers, 2010). As a result, social entrepreneurs contribute by acting as a support system for social enterprises to share knowledge, skills, and experience and to fulfil their social mission by improving life quality (Abu-Saifan, 2012; Sahasranamam & Nandakumar, 2020; Shahverdi, Ismail, & Qureshi, 2018; Sundin, 2011).

Furthermore, S.E. contributes significantly to societies through the generation of social values and the resolution of social and environmental issues through major impacts such as economic recovery, job creation, innovation, and equity promotion (El-den, Adikhari, & Adikhari, 2017). S.E. is also efficient and sustainable since it prioritizes environmental and social values over economic objectives (Capella-Peris, Gil-Gómez, Mart-Puig, & Ruz-Bernardo, 2020). The significant societal consequences of S.E. include providing help during economic downturns through personal and career counseling, job training, and employment to the vulnerable (El-den et al., 2017). Increasing exposure to S.E. as a way of treating or lowering societal-level problems necessitates a thorough examination of the factors influencing the adoption of social entrepreneurial events (Capella-Peris et al.).

This will limit educational possibilities and result in fewer experience in the field of entrepreneurship. Furthermore, this will make it difficult to start a business and will raise unemployment. In comparison to recognized business schools, interest and perception of education for S.E. limit the goal of becoming entrepreneurs (Sliva et al., 2018). Traditional markets and procedures are insufficient to give a good solution to the problem or environment (Kickul, Gundry, Mitra, & Berçot, 2018a). As a result, a variety of difficulties in completing the courses have been documented (Konakll et al., 2016).

The following is how the paper is organized. The next section provides an overview of S.E. in HE, its global deployment, and the roles of social networks in S.E. The research technique utilized to perform the systematic literature review and the essential phases indicated in the procedure are then presented. The next part highlights the results of the obstacles encountered by HE systems in incorporating S.E., as well as ideas for overcoming them. The last section concludes with some final thoughts on S.E. in HE, outlines the limits, and makes recommendations for further study.

Literature review

Higher education social entrepreneurship S.E. has the potential to impact both higher education (HE) and society (Dobele, 2016). The emphasis on S.E. in HE leads to the process of finding the transformation of experience through a compelling setting, which departs from the typical rote learning technique (Apostolakis, 2011). The purpose of S.E. in education is for students to improve their potential as social entrepreneurs by providing them with the necessary information and skills (Solomon, Alabduljader, & Ramani, 2019). In higher education, S.E. contributes to the improvement of educational quality and individual personalities by being attentive to surrounding difficulties and researching new solutions to existing challenges (Sarkaya & Coşkun, 2015). Despite the fact that S.E. is still relatively new, HE has begun to prioritize it as a way of strengthening students' entrepreneurial abilities and instilling social responsibility in students (Shahverdi et al., 2018). It is critical to evaluate the S.E. scale in HE not only to instil entrepreneurial skills but also to characterize the characteristics of social entrepreneurs (Capella-Peris et al., 2020). This field focuses on promoting and aiding the world's primarily disadvantaged people, and it has adapted the significance of its beneficiaries' participation (Mayhew, Simonoff, Baumol, Wiesenfeld, & Klein, 2012). S.E. is one of the rising fields that may be successfully incorporated into the HE learning environment since it entails giving back to society, contributing ideas and activities for desirable outcomes, and raising the quality of life. Students engaged in HE are the ideal demographic for such strategies to foster S.E. with communities, given their potential to carry out new and creative activities in the future (Capella-Peris et al., 2020). HE can raise awareness and sensitivity to social problems by imparting S.E. knowledge through experience (Dobele, 2016). One approach to addressing social problems is to target those nearest to the university (i.e., local concerns) and deliver innovative answers through the S.E. curriculum. Students are provided an opportunity to participate in and contribute to solutions to societal problems, as well as to enhance their learning skills and build professional attitudes (Thomsen et al., 2019). Government support for S.E. in education will demonstrate that both employability and productivity will improve.

The significance of social entrepreneurship in higher education

S.E. is a significant research topic since it helps to form young people, particularly students, with positive attitudes, skills, and mindsets for solving social issues as well as generating sustainable economic growth. As a result, teaching S.E. subjects necessitates suitable academic and research skills and competencies (Dobele, 2016). S.E. in higher education (HE) may be fostered using a variety of approaches, according to Pache and Chowdhury (2012). These include the establishment of S.E. courses as faculty initiatives, university-organized S.E. events, and full educational programs given to selected students who want to concentrate on S.E. The inclusion of S.E. in higher education helps both the university and the community. Students may give more to the community through S.E. (Shahverdi et al., 2018). In the future, more social professionals at the university level may incorporate programs that address social concerns and enhance community living conditions (Othman & Nasrudin, 2016; Wahid et al., 2018). The growth of S.E. in HE can best enhance students' sense of social duty, personal accountability, and creative spirit (Sahasranamam & Nandakumar, 2020). S.E. in HE may be defined by three factors: awareness, intention, and support (Salamzadeh, Azimi, & Kirby, 2013). The first part is being aware of any opportunities where services are required and acting as a chance to benefit society. The second part (i.e., the goal) tries to eliminate social needs or societal issues that generate social enterprise engagement. The final factor is the need for support in attitudes and beliefs, whether in the form of knowledge or resources. Furthermore, entrepreneurship mentality, resources, and social capital all contribute to effective S.E. integration (Radin A Rahman, Ismail, & Sahid, 2019).

Current application of social entrepreneurship in higher education in various institutions throughout the worldM

Implementing S.E. in the HE system has become a global trend, acting as an agent to promote, support, and raise social consciousness. Many higher education institutions have included S.E. in their education system through their implementation approach (Wahid et al., 2018). The educational systems in the nations influence learners' preparedness for improved learning, particularly in dealing with social entrepreneurial activities and new company start-ups (Sahasranamam & Nandakumar, 2020). S.E. should be included in HE since it can provide more advantages than conventional entrepreneurship, which is impacted by environmental, organizational, and individual variables (Dobele, 2016). The diversity of social enterprises produced gives improved access to education through technology with the current curriculum, appropriate industrial skills, and learning opportunities that can strengthen students' future roles as S.E. (Md Ladin, Abdullah, & Abdulsomad, 2017). Table 1 shows the S.E. implementation styles at various colleges throughout the world.

Social networks' importance in S.E.

Using a social network platform to use S.E. in higher education will be more beneficial. The social network assists social entrepreneurs in carrying out a social mission through social innovation. Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, YouTube, and Skype are examples of social networks that can aid with social connectedness. These platforms foster engagement and connection, allowing for consumer communication and the conduct of business online (Shabbir, Ghazi, & Mehmood, 2016). The use of social networking applications empowers the audience to alter or participate in efforts to make a difference. Furthermore, the usage of social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook (Akinyemi, Dilyard, Anderson, & Schroeder, 2013), and YouTube (Dangmei, 2016) expands options for social entrepreneurs to communicate with investors, as well as seek funding, guidance, and business information.

Table 1: List of Universities and programmes

Methodology

This study used the auditable Systematic Literature Review (SLR) strategy based on the original criteria from Kitchenham et al. (2009) to present and analyze the literature related to the study issue. This is a protocol-based technique for doing a literature review with the goal of providing a fair assessment of a study issue. Furthermore, the SLR technique is well-organized and proposes a step-by-step strategy for discovering and choosing relevant publications on a certain topic. Furthermore, the SLR technique stipulates the existence of research questions to aid researchers in obtaining the essential foundation for the study. According to the most recent Research Gate update, the number of citations for Kitchenham et al. (2009) SLR technique research articles approaches 1574. As a result, it demonstrates the dependability of this strategy for summarizing existing evidence. SLR, on the other hand, is used to reduce the risk of bias (Seplveda et al., 2019), determine the current state and identify gaps in areas of study (Zarour, Benmerzoug, Guermouche, & Drira, 2019), and provide necessary information to trace the subsequent results (Vazquez-Ingelmo, Garcia-Penalvo, & Theron, 2019). As a result, SLR is employed as an appropriate strategy to handle S.E. difficulties in HE. SLR procedures are organized into three primary phases: planning, implementation, and reporting.

Phase 1: planning

This study looked at the problems of S.E. deployment and how they were addressed in higher education. It also discussed the role of social networks in supporting and addressing S.E. concerns in higher education. The purpose of this study is to cover, summarize, and synthesize the S.E. problems and to provide best practices from the literature to solve the challenges. Following that, two research questions were established to help with the following phase, which is the systematic literature review process.

Phase 2: Conducting review methods

Data sources and search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and quality evaluation are all part of the review techniques. The process flow of the systematic literature review is depicted in Figure 1. Each SLR process flow is detailed in the sub-sections that follow.

Sources of information and search method

For the literature search, four digital databases were selected and utilized. Web of Science (WoS), Science Direct (S.D.), IEEE, and Scopus (S.C.) are among them. These four databases were chosen because they include a high number of research publications and provide access to multi-disciplinary research, allowing researchers to do in-depth searches on their topic. Only journal papers published between 2010 and 2019 were considered in this analysis. In the search for this review, the keywords "Social Entrepreneurship" AND "Education", "Social Entrepreneurship" AND "Higher Education", "Social Entrepreneurship" AND "Challenges", "Social Entrepreneurship" AND "Best Practices", and "Social Entrepreneurship" AND "Social Network" were used.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The following phase comprised criteria for filtering papers that were appropriate for this investigation. Thus, inclusion and exclusion criteria were chosen to guarantee that the SLR process contained only relevant publications. The following inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to refine the results:

Inclusion criteria

• Based on the terms found in the databases.
• Answer one or more research questions directly or indirectly.
• From 2010 until 2019, it was published.

Exclusion criteria

• Exclude documents that are unrelated to the research topic.
• Articles that did not meet the inclusion requirements.

Figure-1: Azah Anir Normana (2020)

Phase 3: Reporting

Data extraction

Following the conclusion of the evaluation and verification, all relevant publications were classified into a systematic table known as a form based on the data obtained. This form was created using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to allow for easy data organization. As shown in Figure 2, the form aids in the filtering process by displaying the number of documents returned from the first search following inclusion and exclusion criteria and quality ratings. The Mendeley program was used to organize the papers and references. Table 2 displays the data collection from entities utilized in this study to aid in the analysis of the obtained data. The form included the mentioned difficulties and recommended practices. Following that, all of the findings were retrieved to help.

Figure-2 : Azah Anir Normana (2020)

Data analysis

The meta-ethnographic technique was used in this study to synthesize the gathered data by analyzing one study with reference to another with detailed clarification that can link in three ways (Dyb & Dingsyr, 2008). Reciprocal translations, reputational translations, and line of argument are three possible approaches (Dyb & Dingsyr, 2008; Fu, Zhang, Huang, Zhou, & Li, 2019). The reciprocal translations imply that the relevant research reflects on similar topics or concepts. Second, reputational translations emphasize the study's explanation and value reputation as a component of interpretation. Finally, the line of reasoning describes the collection of difficulties in the study that are examined together in order to reach bigger conclusions. In this investigation, the technique used reciprocal translations or directly similar.

Findings and discussion

The thorough systematic study looked at social entrepreneurship ideas in education research publications published between 2010 and 2019. This study intends to identify the problems in integrating S.E. in HE, as well as best practices for overcoming such challenges with the use of social networks. Based on the final set of 42 selected papers, this section analyzes the findings based on the research proposal questions indicated previously in the preceding sections. The findings are addressed in relation to the proposed research questions in order to gain information and evidence for the study focusing on S.E. in HE. "What are the challenges in implementing social entrepreneurship masters in higher education?" asks the first research question.

Challenge 1: design of curricula

S.E. curriculum at higher education institutions may not place as much emphasis as they should on the delivery and application of the most fundamental and crucial parts of S.E. (Paunescu, Dragan, Cantaragiu, & Filculescu, 2012; Shahverdi et al., 2018). S.E. curriculum design begins with an awareness of S.E. ideas (Catherall & Richardson, 2017). This is due to the fact that S.E. is slowly finding its way into the educational system, and the idea is still new, but it requires the incorporation of both knowledge and essential abilities. However, most papers (e.g., Apostolakis, 2011; de Villiers Scheepers, Barnes, Clements, & Stubbs, 2018; Kirby & Ibrahim, 2011; Rahman et al., 2019; Shahverdi et al., 2018; Waghid & Oliver, 2017) mentioned that a lack of general acceptance of the concept for S.E. could lead to misunderstanding and confusion.

Challenge 2: Economic and financing difficulties

The next obstacle in integrating S.E. in higher education is the financial management and finance issues. As S.E. focuses on social effect rather than money, supporting finances remains low (Luc, 2018). Lack of support, particularly in terms of money (i.e., a lack of government financial grants and entrepreneurship and S.E. activity resources), might contribute to a reduction in S.E. activities at higher education institutions (Said, Ahmad, Md Yusof, & Jusoh, 2015). financial and grant sources are competing more to fine-tune their financial allocations to groups they feel are best positioned to satisfy society's needs (Carraher, Welsh, & Svilokos, 2016).

Challenge 3: lack of specialists to offer S.E. courses

The third difficulty is a dearth of experts who are enthusiastic enough to teach the S.E. courses. This resulted in a lack of explicit and tacit knowledge, as well as specific S.E. training for students (Shahverdi et al., 2018). Universities are unable to give their students the necessary S.E. curriculum due to a dearth of specialists to teach S.E. courses (Salamzadeh, Azimi, & Kirby, 2013). Worsham (2012) discovered a gap in S.E. teaching methodology in his research. There is a need to go into the evolution of teaching and learning in greater depth, as well as the contrasts and parallels between S.E. and other forms of entrepreneurship. Furthermore, determining if S.E. deployment in teaching and learning is required is difficult.

Challenge 4: social and university environment concerns that are restrictive

The last problem in applying S.E. in higher education is that it confronts social and university environment difficulties. Students must discover, experience, and be involved in their local and social concerns in order to create a favourable learning environment for S.E. However, an unfriendly atmosphere will demotivate students (Sarkaya & Coşkun, 2015), resulting in fewer S.E. projects (Estrin, Mickiewicz, & Stephan, 2016) and fewer campus creative activities (Konakll, 2015). Lack of encouragement at universities for building a suitable S.E. environment would result in limitations of social innovations without the assistance to conduct and stress the value of these courses (Kummitha & Majumdar, 2015). Universities are ideal locations for increasing support for social innovation and entrepreneurship master's education.

Conclusion

Previous research has been utilized better to understand the obstacles to S.E. adoption in higher education. The relevance of having an S.E. curriculum in HE demonstrates the need to acknowledge the issues and treat them appropriately through various approaches. This study identified four major problems in applying S.E. in higher education. Based on our findings, we discovered that a lack of comprehension of the S.E. idea has resulted in additional concerns, such as a lack of S.E. growth in the official academic curriculum. The S.E. method in education can thus catalyze new solutions and possibilities. Several best practices were proposed during the challenges discussion to assist in overcoming the highlighted concerns. The procedures proposed can be put in place to boost the chances of courses being delivered in favourable ways. The advantages of encouraging social networks as options for interactive players to share and debate S.E. relevance with fewer constraints were explored. The functions of social networks in S.E. must be explored in order to break down any obstacles in the curriculum since they may be extremely beneficial in the future growth of S.E. in HE. More changes to HE are needed in the future to make the role of S.E. more visible and understandable in order to have a stronger impact on society.

Check out our blog to learn more about A Literature Review on Social Entrepreneurship research- Future research directions.

References

1. Abi-Aad, G. (2015). Social media for social entrepreneurship. Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249379
2. Abu-Saifan, S. (2012). Social entrepreneurship: Definition and boundaries. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(2), 22–27.
3. Adhana, D. (2020). Social stock exchange: An innovative financing platform for social enterprises in India. SSRN ElectronicJournal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3619235
4. Adnan, R. M., Yusoff, W. F. W., & Ghazali, N. (2018). The role of social Eentrepreneurship in Malaysia: A preliminaryanalysis. Advanced Science Letters, 24(5), 3264–3269. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2018.11355
5. Akhmetshin, E.M., & Polyakova, A.G. (2018). Approaches to social entrepreneurship in Russia and foreign countries.Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 21, 1–10.
6. Akinyemi, J., Dilyard, J., Anderson, D., & Schroeder, K. (2013). Innovation and technology for social enterprises. New York:United Nations.
7. Ali, N., & Usman, M. (2018). Reliability of search in systematic reviews: Towards a quality assessment framework for theautomated-search strategy. Information and Software Technology, 99 133–147. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2018.02.002
8. Andriyansah, & Zahra, F. (2017). Student awareness towards social entrepreneurship: A qualitative study. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(6), 457–464 Apostolakis, C. (2011). The role of higher education in enhancing social entrepreneurship. International Journal of Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 1(2), 124.
9. Aruch, M., Loja, A., Sanders, J.B., Aruch, M., Loja, A., & Sanders, J.B. (2013). Social entrepreneurship and information and communication technologies in Ecuador: Examples and opportunities. International Educational Innovation and Public Sector Entrepreneurship, 157–188. doi:10.1108/s1479-3679(2013)0000023003.
10. Bazan, C., Gaultois, H., Shaikh, A., Gillespie, K., Frederick, S., Amjad, A., . . . Belal, N. (2020). Effect of the university on the social entrepreneurial intention of students. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/neje-05-2019–0026
11. Capella-Peris, C., Gil-Gómez, J., Martí-Puig, M., & Ruíz-Bernardo, P. (2020). Development and validation of a scale to assess social entrepreneurship competency in higher education. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 23–39.
12. Carraher, S.M., Welsh, D.H.B., & Svilokos, A. (2016). Validation of a measure of social entrepreneurship. European Journal International Management, 10(4), 386–402.
13. Catherall, R., & Richardson, M. (2017). Social entrepreneurship in education. Bulletin of the Orton Society, 25(1), 159–161.
14. Chong, P., & Kleemann, L. (2011). The future of funding for social enterprises, Kiel policy brief/Institut für Weltwirtschaft an der Universität Kiel, No. 34. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/52505
15. Cinar, R. (2019). Delving into social entrepreneurship in universities: Is it legitimate yet?. Regional Studies Regional Science, 6(1), 217–232.
16. Cincera, J., Biberhofer, P., Binka, B., Boman, J., Mindt, L., & Rieckmann, M. (2018). Designing a sustainability-driven entrepreneurship curriculum as a social learning process: A case study from an international knowledge alliance project. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 4357–4366.
17. Dangmei, J. (2016). Social entrepreneurship and social networks for sustainable rural development in India. Paripex - Indian Journal of Research, 5(10), 622–624 Daraban, B. (2016). Building a curriculum for social business entrepreneurship. Studies in Business and Economics, 11(2), 19–25.
18. de Villiers Scheepers, M.J., Barnes, R., Clements, M., & Stubbs, A.J. (2018). Preparing future-ready graduates through experiential entrepreneurship. Education + Training, ET-11-2017-0167. doi:10.1108/ET-11-2017-0167.
19. Dobele, L. (2016). A new approach in higher education: Social entrepreneurship education and its influencing factors. Management, Enterprise and Benchmarking, (Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management), 227–238.
20. Duval-Couetil, N. (2013). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programs: Challenges and approaches. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 394–409.
21. Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 50(9–10), 833–859.
22. El-den, J., Adikhari, P., & Adikhari, P. (2017). Social media in the service of social entrepreneurship: Identifying factors for better services. Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(2), 105–114.
23. Erturgut, R., & Soysekerci, S. (2012). Social entrepreneurship effect on educational activity: The research in Turkey universities. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46(1997), 3954–3958.
24. Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T., & Stephan, U. (2016). Human capital in social and commercial entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(4), 449–467.
25. Fink, R., Thompson, C.J., & Bonnes, D. (2005). Overcoming barriers and promoting the use of research in practice. Journal of Nursing Administration, 35(3), 121–129.
26. Forsström-Tuominen, H., Jussila, I., & Kolhinen, J. (2015). Business school students' social construction of entrepreneurship: Claiming space for collective entrepreneurship discourses. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(1), 102–120
27. Halberstadt, J., Timm, M., Kraus, S., & Gundolf, K. (2019). Skills and knowledge management in higher education: How service learning can contribute to social entrepreneurial competence development. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(10), 1925–3270.
28. Hamid, S., Waycott, J., Kurnia, S., & Chang, S. (2014). An empirical study of lecturers' appropriation of social technologies for higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(3), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.690
29. Hoefer, R.A., & Sliva, S.M. (2016). Social enterprise in higher education: A viable venture? Journal of Social Work Education, 52(4), 422–433.
30. Islam, N., & Ozuem, W. (2019). The impact of social media on social entrepreneurship in a developing country. U.K. Academy for Information Systems Conference Proceedings 2019. 46. Oxford, United Kingdom. https://aisel.aisnet.org/ukais2019/46