Developing Platform Ecosystem for Resource Mobilization: The Case of Social Enterprises in India

References

• Alvord, S. H., Brown, L. D., & Letts, C. W. (2004). Social entrepreneurship and societal transformation: An exploratory study. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(3), 260–282. doi:10.1177/0021886304266847
   Google Scholar
• Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei‐Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22. doi:10.1111/etap.2006.30.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bacq, S., Ofstein, L. F., Kickul, J. R., & Gundry, L. K. (2015). Bricolage in social entrepreneurship: How creative resource mobilization fosters greater social impact. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 16(4), 283–289. doi:10.5367/ijei.2015.0198
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing – Insights from the study of SEs. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441. doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.893615
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battilana, J., Lee, M., Walker, J., & Dorsey, C. (2012). In search of the hybrid ideal. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10(3), 50–55.
   Google Scholar
• Bhatt, P., & Altinay, L. (2013). How social capital is leveraged in social innovations under resource constraints? Management Decision, 51(9), 1772–1792. doi:10.1108/MD-01-2013-0041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloom, P. N., & Dees, G. (2008). Cultivate your ecosystem. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(1), 47–53.
   Google Scholar
• Boudreau, K. J. (2010). Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access vs. devolving control. Management Science, 56(10), 1849–1872. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1100.1215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, L. D., & Kalegaonkar, A. (2002). Support organizations and the evolution of the NGO sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31(2), 231–258. doi:10.1177/0899764002312004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1–34. doi:10.2307/2393807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brusoni, S. (2005). The limits to specialization: Problem solving and coordination in ‘modular networks’. Organization Studies, 26(2), 1885–1907. doi:10.1177/0170840605059161
   Google Scholar
• Ceccagnoli, M., Forman, C., Huang, P., & Wu, D. J. (2012). Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem: The case of enterprise software. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 263–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan, S., & Goyal, S. (2018). Platform ecosystems: The expert opinion. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 20(1),1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Corner, P. D., & Ho, M. (2010). How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 635–659. doi:10.1111/etap.2010.34.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dacin, P. A., Dacin, M. T., & Matear, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: Why we don’t need a new theory and how we move forward from here. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 37–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das, A. K., & Bharadwaj, S. S. (2017). Framework for alignment of service provider value drivers with client expectations in IT services outsourcing. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 19(1), 34–61. doi:10.1080/15228053.2017.1317161
   Google Scholar
• Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, 76, 54–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2008). SE in Europe: Recent trends and developments. SE Journal, 4(3), 202–228.
   Google Scholar
• Desa, G. (2012). Resource mobilization in international social entrepreneurship: Bricolage as a mechanism of institutional transformation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 727–751. doi:10.1111/etap.2012.36.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desa, G., & Basu, S. (2013). Optimization or bricolage? Overcoming resource constraints in global social entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(1), 26–49. doi:10.1002/sej.2013.7.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Domenico, M., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 681–703. doi:10.1111/etap.2010.34.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Domenico, M., Tracey, P., & Haugh, H. (2009). The dialectic of social exchange: Theorizing corporate—SE collaboration. Organization Studies, 30(8), 887–907. doi:10.1177/0170840609334954
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). SEs as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 417–436. doi:10.1111/ijmr.12028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550. doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. doi:10.5465/amj.2007.24160888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Opening platforms: How, when, and why? In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, markets and innovation (pp. 131–162). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, Mass: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2011). Platform envelopment. Strategic Management Journal, 32(12), 1270–1285. doi:10.1002/smj.v32.12
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandez, W. D., & Lehmann, H. (2011). Case studies and grounded theory method in information systems research: Issues and use. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 13(1), 4–15. doi:10.1080/15228053.2011.10856199
   Google Scholar
• Friese, S. (2014). Qualitative data analysis with ATLAS. ti. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Gawer, A. (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7), 1239–1249. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2002). Platform leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation (pp. 29–30). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gawer, A., & Henderson, R. (2007). Platform owner entry and innovation in complementary markets: Evidence from Intel. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 16(1), 1–34. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9134.2007.00130.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, S. (2008). The case for case-based research. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 10(1), 1–6. doi:10.1080/15228053.2008.10856126
   Google Scholar
• Gras, D., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2012). Strategic foci in social and commercial entrepreneurship: A comparative analysis. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 6–23. doi:10.1080/19420676.2012.660888
   Google Scholar
• Haugh, H. (2005). A research agenda for social entrepreneurship. SE Journal, 1(1), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Haugh, H. (2007). Community‐led social venture creation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(2), 161–182. doi:10.1111/etap.2007.31.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Isenberg, D. J. (2010). How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), 40–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jha, S. K., Pinsonneault, A., & Dubé, L. (2016). The evolution of an ICT platform-enabled ecosystem for poverty alleviation: The case of eKutir. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 40(2), 431–445. doi:10.25300/MISQ/2016/40.2.08
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, D., & Mendelson, H. (2008). Divide and conquer: Competing with free technology under network effects. Production and Operations Management, 17(1), 12–28. doi:10.3401/poms.1070.0005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. (2001). Grounded theory in management research. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Lounsbury, M., & Glynn, M. A. (2001). Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6‐7), 545–564. doi:10.1002/smj.188
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lumpkin, G. T., Moss, T. W., Gras, D. M., Kato, S., & Amezcua, A. S. (2013). Entrepreneurial processes in social contexts: How are they different, if at all? Small Business Economics, 40(3), 761–783. doi:10.1007/s11187-011-9399-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 36–44. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2005.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 5(2), 28–39.
   Google Scholar
• McNamara, P., Pazzaglia, F., & Sonpar, K. (2018). Large-scale events as catalysts for creating mutual dependence between social ventures and resource providers. Journal of Management, 44(2), 470–500. doi:10.1177/0149206314563983
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyskens, M., & Carsrud, A. L. (2013). Nascent green-technology ventures: A study assessing the role of partnership diversity in firm success. Small Business Economics, 40(3), 739–759. doi:10.1007/s11187-011-9400-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyskens, M., Robb‐Post, C., Stamp, J. A., Carsrud, A. L., & Reynolds, P. D. (2010). Social ventures from a resource‐based perspective: An exploratory study assessing global Ashoka fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 661–680. doi:10.1111/etap.2010.34.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A method sourcebook. CA, US: Sage publications.
   Google Scholar
• Mir, R., & Watson, A. (2001). Critical realism and constructivism in strategy research: Toward a synthesis. Strategic Management Journal, 22(12), 1169–1173. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moizer, J., & Tracey, P. (2010). Strategy making in SE: The role of resource allocation and its effects on organizational sustainability. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 27(3), 252–266. doi:10.1002/sres.1006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newbert, S. L., & Hill, R. P. (2014). Setting the stage for paradigm development: A ‘small-tent’ approach to social entrepreneurship. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 5(3), 243–269. doi:10.1080/19420676.2014.889738
   Google Scholar
• Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2010). When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 455–476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2013). Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 972–1001. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peredo, A. M., & McLean, M. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 56–65. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2005.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pick, J. B. (2017). Smart cities in the United States and worldwide: A rich arena for MIS studies. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 19(3), 133–144. doi:10.1080/15228053.2017.1363597
   Google Scholar
• Pratono, A. H., & Sutanti, A. (2016). The ecosystem of SE: Social culture, legal framework, and policy review in Indonesia. Pacific Science Review B: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(3), 106–112.
   Google Scholar
• Raffa, L., & Capaldo, G. (2007). Understanding alignment during implementation of an IS: Two case studies in Italian IT development firms. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 9(4), 11–28. doi:10.1080/15228053.2007.10856122
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Sako, M. (2009). Outsourcing of tasks and outsourcing of assets: Evidence from automotive suppliers parks in Brazil. In A. Gawer (Ed.), Platforms, markets and innovation (pp. 251–272). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, Mass: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Sanderson, S. W., & Uzumeri, M. (1995). Managing product families: The case of the SonyWalkman. Research Policy, 24(5), 761–782. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)00797-B
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos, F. M. (2012). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 335–351. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1413-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2009). Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 643–671. doi:10.5465/amj.2009.43669892
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkar, S. (2018). Grassroots entrepreneurs and social change at the bottom of the pyramid: The role of bricolage. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 30(3–4), 421–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah, P. (2013, May 15). Building an ecosystem for social entrepreneurship in rural livelihoods. Retrieved from http://blogs.worldbank.org
   Google Scholar
• Shane, S. A. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Shin, B., & Dick, K. (2005). A comparison of the business strategies of two telecommunication service providers. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 7(2), 19–30. doi:10.1080/15228053.2005.10856063
   Google Scholar
• Short, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(2), 161–194. doi:10.1002/sej.v3:2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 151–168.
   Google Scholar
• Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633–642. doi:10.5465/amj.2006.22083020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tornikoski, E. T., & Newbert, S. L. (2007). Exploring the determinants of organizational emergence: A legitimacy perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(2), 311–335. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tracey, P., & Phillips, N. (2007). The distinctive challenge of educating social entrepreneurs: A postscript and rejoinder to the special issue on entrepreneurship education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(2), 264–271. doi:10.5465/amle.2007.25223465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vestrum, I., & Rasmussen, E. (2013). How community ventures mobilise resources: Developing resource dependence and embeddedness. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 19(3), 283–302. doi:10.1108/13552551311330183
   Google Scholar
• Wei-Skillern, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship in the social sector. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Zahra, S. A., & Nambisan, S. (2012). Entrepreneurship and strategic thinking in business ecosystems. Business Horizons, 55(3), 219–229. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2011.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, M. A., & Zeitz, G. J. (2002). Beyond survival: Achieving new venture growth by building legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 414–431. doi:10.5465/amr.2002.7389921
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zirpoli, F., & Becker, M. C. (2011). The limits of design and engineering outsourcing: Performance integration and the unfulfilled promises of modularity. R&D Management, 41(1), 21–43. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00629.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar