Comparison of work integration social enterprises in Taiwan and Hong Kong: resource mixes and governance

Work integration social enterprises (WISE) providing social services and products are the most visible forms of social enterprises both in Taiwan and Hong Kong. This type of social enterprise is deeply concerned with the... [ view full abstract ]

Work integration social enterprises (WISE) providing social services and products are the most visible forms of social enterprises both in Taiwan and Hong Kong. This type of social enterprise is deeply concerned with the socially disadvantaged minority and it is able to integrate them with the labor market by providing them with proper training and employment assistance, which allow them to connect with the society and achieve self-empowerment in the long run. Some of these work integration businesses in the two regions have achieved notable results in terms of vocational training, counseling and job placement for their beneficiaries; they have also contributed to change the public’s perception towards people with disabilities. The authors of this paper attempt to make a comparison of WISE in Taiwan and Hong Kong, focusing on two significant issues, that is, “resource mixes” and “governance”.

The first issue concerned in this study is about the strategies of resource mobilization adopted frequently by the WISE in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Are WISE in the two regions increasingly adopting mixed financial resource strategies? Are these strategies able to be sustainable over time for the WISE? This is a question with which we are considerably concerned but not be answered yet. Teasdale, Kerlin, Young and Soh (2013) in their panel study on this topic, highlighting that mixed revenue strategies adopted by nonprofits in the United States from 1998 to 2007 appeared less sustainable over time than mainly commercial or mainly donative strategies. Based on their findings, they suggested that “for most nonprofits, relying predominately on either commercial or donative revenue is a more stable equilibrium than attempting to achieve a balanced revenue mix” (Teasdale et al., 2013: 69). But the exceptional cases are also can be discovered easily in Taiwan. Children Are US Foundation (CAREUS), a large and popular WISE in Taiwan, is a good example for illustrating this point.

What is the major difference linked to the type of government support provided to WISE in Taiwan and Hong Kong? Will the Taiwanese government tends to implement a number of measures to support NPOs creating employment opportunities for people with disabilities? By contrast, will the Hong Kong government operates on the basis of the laissez-faire principle and tends to keep direct intervention in the market to its minimal level? Is its apparent that Hong Kong Government support for WISE more in providing funding support and attempting to create an enabling societal environment for WISE, rather than implementing direct policies regulating social enterprises.

Concerning the second important issue-“governance”, the authors of this study will devote ourselves to the exploration of the following questions: Are the governance structure of WISE in Taiwan and Hong Kong now gradually diversified than before, showing a tendency of the WISE to increase specialization inside an organization in response to the development of social enterprises? Do most traditional NPO operating WISE not have business backgrounds while there are growing trends of businessmen joining the SE initiatives? Do CEOs of WISE in the both regions have strong impacts on decision-making concerning the WISE operation and management?

The data used for this paper derive from the third comparative study survey conducted in 2013 . In addition, this paper will be supplemented by a collection of qualitative data from interviews with key leaders (e.g., board members, CEOs and managers) of six mid to large-size (total annual revenue is over 1 million USD) work-integrated social enterprises operating now in Taiwan and Hong Kong to further understand the association between the resource mobilization and governance of WISE and the employment creation and poverty alleviation for disadvantaged groups.