Social Entrepreneurship: Societal Wealth Creation Under Conditions of Near-Knightian Uncertainty
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Social Entrepreneurship: Societal Wealth Creation Under Conditions of Near-Knightian Uncertainty THÈSE NO 5179 (2012) PRÉSENTÉE LE 21 MAI 2012 AU COLLÈGE DU MANAGEMENT DE LA TECHNOLOGIE CHAIRE ENTREPRENEURIAT ET COMMERCIALISATION DE TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAMME DOCTORAL EN MANAGEMENT DE LA TECHNOLOGIE ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FÉDÉRALE DE LAUSANNE POUR L'OBTENTION DU GRADE DE DOCTEUR ÈS SCIENCES PAR James David THOMPSON acceptée sur proposition du jury: Prof. C. Tucci, président du jury Prof. M. Gruber, directeur de thèse Prof. R. Gunther McGrath, rapporteur Prof. I. MacMillan, rapporteur Prof. A. Wadhwa, rapporteur Suisse 2012 ii iii iv DEDICATION For my mother, who has given more generously than a son could ask or expect; and without whom this would not be. For my father, who believed it was a good idea. For my sister, who is always there, no matter what. For Greg and Calvin; may they grow to be good men. And in memory of my brother who we still miss dearly. v vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation started before I knew it had. It began with a conversation with Ian MacMillan (Mac) and the subsequent launch of a path-changing research project. The road was later redirected with Marc Gruber in the form of a PhD. Many people enabled this thesis along the way and it is my privilege to acknowledge some of them here. I am fortunate to have an exceptionally accomplished committee and I am deeply grateful to each member. As my advisor, Marc was a constant reminder of protocol, procedure, and theoretical rigor. Most of all, he did so while allowing me the flexibility to explore and make shifts in dissertation direction. Rita McGrath taught me to step back when challenged, and think from a different perspective, or to reframe the question. Her incisive intellect got me through deep waters on occasion and, regardless of her hectic schedule, made time when asked, be it from home, an airport, or a break between classes. Anu Wadhwa encouraged me to think candidly about the research findings and their contribution to, and fit within, the literature. None of this work would have been possible without the support of Ian MacMillan and his research center at Wharton. I am forever grateful for his guidance, backing, and insistence on pellucidity between raw data and research output. The EPFL doctoral program faculty and staff were a joy to work with and graciously accommodated me as an external PhD student, on campus and from afar. Chris Tucci always made time for my questions and served as my defense jury president. Sandra Roux and Vanessa Maier from the Doctoral Students’ Office ensured that I met all administration requirements. Their patience, attention to detail, and assistance are a credit to the institution and a fond memory of my time at EPFL. Céline Cordey made my life as an international student easier. One of the greatest benefits of this journey has been the shared experiences and perspectives of fellow PhD’s students and visiting scholars, many of whom have become vii friends in the process. Sami Relander, Martin Ihrig, Marko Torkkeli, and Jana Thiel are four such contemporaries. Other support aside, Jana saved me from a technology failure and helped me keep to a submission deadline - never losing her composure - a continent away. Thanks Jana! I benefited tremendously from the experience and talent of colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania. Harbir Singh opened doors to my pick of PhD courses and his strategy seminar. Harvey Friedman was instrumental in gaining access to the field research site in Botswana. David Galligan offered vital nutrition formulation assistance in the Feeds program. Gary Cohen was a calm voice of experience and coherent thought when presented with a quandary. His availability, humor, and insight into the Swiss system were a considerable asset and deeply appreciated. Roz Cohen is a confidante extraordinaire; and a savvy collector (but unselfish distributor) of resources. Her contributions are too many to mention here. I can offer only my heartfelt thanks and the recognition that this would not be complete without her. I was fortunate to have a talented group of student research assistants over the past five years. Chris Wilfong has analytical capabilities and a work ethic that most do not. His brief career after Wharton and subsequent upcoming graduation from MIT is further affirmation of a bright future. Roberto Sanabria has a programming gift. Ravi Bellur will hopefully succeed in investment banking and spread some wealth in the social entrepreneurship sector. Beth Mlynarczyk did outstanding industry research and was rewarded with a well-deserved international opportunity. My thanks go to all the other students who also played a role. Research of this nature is impossible without funding. My thanks go to Wharton and Wharton alumni who have sponsored this work. In particular the Collins, Gruber, Holekamp, viii Meyer, Poole, Rosenstein and Trone families for their interest, commitment, and willingness to support work in a space fraught with uncertainty. Social entrepreneurs, their organizations, and affiliates, are at the core of this thesis. Their efforts in trying to make their world a better place and their willingness to engage with us were vital ingredients in doing in-depth longitudinal research. My thanks go to Savvas Samaras, Ilona Thompson, Chikwanda Chilufya, Mushipe Mupfudze, Max Sitonya, Stanley Phiri, Diana Dickinson, Nikki Jones, Gill Jones, Tim Jones, Neville Newey, Charl van Niekerk, Alicia Polak, and Andre Haasbroek. Thanks also to the others who are not mentioned, a number of whom for confidentiality reasons. Of course there are others that endure a dissertation even though not directly involved. Jean MacMillan must be thrilled that this is over. I thank her for tolerating the extended process and for the sacrifice of family time which it entailed. My family and friends were constant sources of support despite my prolonged absence from their lives. For this I am profoundly grateful. Thanks again Mac, Marc, Ilona and Roz. March 21, 2012 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ix x Table of Contents 1. Research Question .................................................................................................................... 1 2. Social Entrepreneurship ........................................................................................................ 11 2.1 Dissertation Focus ........................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Innovation ....................................................................................................................................... 19 2.3 The Management of Uncertainty ..................................................................................................... 21 3. Research Design ...................................................................................................................... 27 3.1 Research Strategy ............................................................................................................................ 27 3.2 Research Setting .............................................................................................................................. 31 3.3 Level of Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 36 3.4 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 37 4. Field Studies ............................................................................................................................ 53 4.1 Feeds Program ................................................................................................................................. 54 4.2 Medical Program ............................................................................................................................. 76 4.3 Baked Goods Program .................................................................................................................... 86 4.4 Widows and Orphans Program ..................................................................................................... 107 5. Inductive Insights and Propositions .................................................................................... 119 5.1 The Need to Reconcile Expectations and Tensions between the Dual Outcomes of Social Impact and Profit ........................................................................................................................... 120 5.2 Uncertainty Reduction and Aspiration Cascades .......................................................................... 123 5.3 The Emergence of Corrosive Costs ............................................................................................... 126 5.4 Deeply Entrenched, Inimical Interest in Sustaining the Status Quo, Despite Suffering ................ 130 5.5 High Probability of Failure of Either / Both Commercial and Social Objectives ......................... 133 5.6 Emergence of Unanticipated Consequences ................................................................................. 135 5.7 Theoretical Problems .................................................................................................................... 140 6. Discussion of Results and Implications for Theory ........................................................... 149 6.1 Social Entrepreneurship ...............................................................................................................