class="p1">Another important aspect that reflects the stability of organizations relates to maintaining the number of employees. In most organizations (85 %) the number of staff either remained the same or even increased. Organizations that operate on “hybrid” or predominantly external funding (“non-profit” organizations) were in the best position to retain headcount.
Overall, it can be noted that the overall picture among those who participated in the survey is quite positive. Social entrepreneurs have been able to maintain their positions on most critical factors, and some have even improved their performance. However, it is also necessary to mention the limitation of the study related to the “survivor effect”; in other words, the survey involved mainly those organizations that survived the crisis period and continued their activities. But despite this limitation, the important question, of course, is what strategies were used by those social entrepreneurs who had been able to cope with the challenges of a turbulent period.
The study highlighted three types of strategies, each packing a set of specific strategic actions:
• Strategies to improve efficiency (improving existing products; improving the professional competencies of the team; maintaining and protecting the positions achieved before the pandemic; optimizing business processes; optimizing the cost structure; improving the way goods/services are delivered);
• Growth strategies (creating brand new products; reaching new beneficiary segments; developing a new formal development strategy for the organization; entering new product customer segments; creating customer services; locating additional revenue sources; creating new ways to deliver products; expanding into new cities and regions; launching online sales; launching new digital products; acquiring new assets; launching digital versions of existing products);
• Development of interaction with stakeholders (attracting new partners; expanding the team; attracting non-profit funding; association with other social entrepreneurs; attracting new suppliers; interaction with public authorities; attracting investment).
According to the study, the most popular and successful strategies of social entrepreneurs in the pandemic were aimed at improving efficiency, namely: improving existing products, improving the professional competencies of the team; optimizing business processes. Growth strategies and interaction with stakeholders were also in demand, albeit to a lesser degree. The most popular directions among the growth strategies, however, were: creating brand new products; reaching new beneficiary segments; developing a new formal development strategy for the organization; and reaching new product customer segments. Among the strategies aimed at building interaction with stakeholders, particularly demanded ones included: attracting new partners; expanding the team; and teaming up with other social entrepreneurs (See Figure 2).
Thus, we can conclude that despite the high level of uncertainty, variability and unpredictable environment caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, social entrepreneurs have been able to adapt, to turn challenges into opportunities — not only to get together to optimize business processes and costs in difficult times, but also to develop new products, delivery methods, build new partnerships. Of course, the sector representatives still have room to develop the application of the most effective strategies discussed above, but we can already say with certainty that, despite the specifics of such organizations, primarily related to the need to balance the creation of social and economic value, they can successfully survive and develop in the challenging VUCA world. This phenomenon can likely be explained not only by their strong entrepreneurial spirit but also by their responsibility to their beneficiaries.
* Of the total number of respondents.
Figure 2. Social Entrepreneurs’ Strategies during the Pandemic
P. S. While you were reading this article, the VUCA world has moved even closer to the state of BANI: B (Brittle), A (Anxious), N (Nonlinear), I (Incomprehensible). This means that the organizational management tools once again need to be rethought to match the new realities [46].
REFERENCES
1. Aray, Y., Burmistrova, T. (2014) Specifics of business models in social entrepreneurship. Russian Journal of Management, Vol. 12, No. 4, p. 55–78. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University Press. (In Russian).
2. McGrath, R. (2011) When Your Business Model Is in Trouble. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2011/01/when-your-business-model-is-in-trouble (accessed: 15.09.2022).
3. Billman, E., Whalen, J., Nidumolu, R., Ellison, J. (2014) The Collaboration Imperative. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2014/04/the-collaboration-imperative-2 (accessed: 15.09.2022).
4. Jordan, J. (2018) Lessons in Agility from a Dancer Turned Professor. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2020/04/lessons-in-agility-from-a-dancer-turned-professor (accessed: 15.09.2022).
5. Jacobides, M. (2019) In the Ecosystem Economy, What’s Your Strategy? Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2019/09/in-the-ecosystem-economy-whats-your-strategy (accessed: 15.09.2022).
6. Drucker, P. (2006) Managing in Turbulent Times. Harper.
Новая жизнь издательского проекта «Каталог «Социальное предпринимательство России»
Зачем мы с 2014 года собираем примеры, кейсы и обзоры социальных предприятий, независимо от их формы собственности и сферы деятельности? Мы видим, как из почти незаметных на уровне статистик и расчетов ВВП постепенно растут новые элементы экономики. Одна из их характерных черт — открытость к кооперации и узнаванию друг друга. Именно эта черта вызвала цепную последовательность стимулирующего законодательства в одной из самых передовых экономик мира — в Республике Корея, когда от закона о социальном предпринимательстве стал возможен переход к более широкому закону о социальной кооперации и затем к закону о социальной экономике. Социальные предприятия изначально и потенциально готовятся выстраивать экосистемы позитивных изменений, когда для этого придет время. Они создают совокупность предприятий и сообщества, которые являются частью единой системы, работающей над созиданием и созданием человеко-ориентированной социальной экономики.
В каждом номере журнала «Позитивные изменения» мы продолжаем работу, начатую в период издания ежегодного каталога «Социальное предпринимательство России». Мы представляем читателю и исследователю предприятия, объединяющие в себе характеристики двух субъектов прежних экономических отношений — некоммерческого и коммерческого. Это объединение позволяет создавать предприятия-носители позитивных моделей будущего — социальные предприятия. А они в свою очередь создают, внедряют и распространяют свой опыт и практику решений на все отрасли. Главное сейчас — видеть их именно как драйверов будущего, и поэтому ключевой критерий отбора для социальных предприятий в журнал — наличие данных об оценке социального эффекта и социального воздействия на изменения в жизни сообществ и общества в целом.
Владимир Вайнер
Директор «Фабрики позитивных изменений»
