Theory
“Hybrid organizations” borrow elements or “logics” from different established organizational categories and combine them into a novel, blended organizational form (Battilana & Dorado 2010: 1419; Scott 2001). Social enterprises are typical examples of hybrid organizations that combine institutional logics associated with business, state and civil society forms (Battilana & Lee 2014; Defourny & Nyssens 2006; Doherty et al. in press; Evers & Laville 2004). New hybrid organizations face "the double challenge of having to survive as new ventures while striking a delicate balance between the [different] logics they combine [...] so as to avoid mission drift" (Battilana & Dorado 2010: 1419). This balancing process is likely to influence (and be influenced by) growth trajectories, which have been found to be particularly important for social enterprises seeking to increase their social and environmental impact (Lyon & Fernandez 2012; Mulgan et al. 2007). Despite the centrality of growth in the social enterprise literature, few studies so far have examined the interrelation between growth and hybridity.
Research question
This research is guided by the following question: to what extent can growth strategies of social enterprises influence and be influenced by the types of goals pursued, i.e. their “hybridity mix”?
Methods
This paper aims to address this research gap by contrasting two cases to allow for theoretical development (Yin 2009). The cases are “renewable energy cooperatives through which citizens become producers, investors and in some cases consumers of renewable energy. Combining economic, social and environmental aims, renewable energy cooperatives are typical hybrid organizations that borrow logics and practices from businesses, environmental organizations and community groups. The two cooperatives studied here, Ecopower and Beauvent, share a number of common features: they are located in Flanders (Belgium), they operate exclusively with renewable energy, they are owned by individual members who each have equal voting rights and receive limited dividends following the principles of the cooperative movement, and they are part of the Belgian federation of renewable energy cooperatives Rescoop.be. However, they clearly differ in terms of both growth strategies and organizational missions and activities.
The data collection included 16 interviews, among which 6 with members, 8 with managers and workers, and 2 with board members, as well as 18 documents. Interview transcripts and documents were coded in terms of growth strategies and priorities regarding the goals and activities of the cooperative (i.e. the hybridity mix favored).
Contributions
The findings bring several theoretical contributions. First, by contrasting two ways of understanding and implementing hybridity in the same field, the study contributes to the emerging empirical work that explores how organizations deal with multiple logics and how this concretely translates into organizational aims and practices. Second, the findings identify and contrast different types of growth avenues, which are then connected to the different ways of conceiving and implementing hybridity. Third, the study documents how organizations can implement sustainable development aims and practices and consider growth not only as a way of serving internal stakeholders (investors, employees or managers) but also as a contribution to a broader societal dynamic, thereby serving as examples for other organizations in their field and beyond.
References
Battilana, J. & Dorado, S. (2010), “Building sustainable hybrid organizations: the case of commercial microfinance organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, 53:6, 1419-1440.
Battilana, J. & Lee, M. (2014), “Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing – Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises”, The Academy of Management Annals, 8:1, 397-441.
Defourny, J. & Nyssens, M. (2006), “Defining social enterprise”, in M. Nyssens (Ed.), Social Enterprise. At the crossroads of market, public policies and civil society, Routledge, London, 3-26.
Doherty, B., Haugh, H. & Lyon, F. (in press), “Social Enterprises as Hybrid Organizations: A Review and Research Agenda”, International Journal of Management Reviews.
Evers, A. & Laville, J.-L. (2004), “Defining the Third Sector in Europe”, in A. Evers & J.-L. Laville (Eds.), The Third Sector in Europe, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, USA.
Lyon, F. & Fernandez, H. (2012), “Strategies for scaling up social enterprise: lessons from early years providers”, Social Enterprise Journal, 8:1, 63-77.
Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R. & Sanders, B. (2007), Social innovation: what it is, why it matters and how it can be accelerated, Working Paper, Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, Oxford.
