What do social entrepreneurs need to walk their talk? Understanding the attitude–behavior gap in social impact assessment practice

• Date: 01 September 2018
• Author: Cecilia Grieco
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21310
• Published date: 01 September 2018

RESEARCH ARTICLE

What do social entrepreneurs need to walk their

talk? Understanding the attitude–behavior gap

in social impact assessment practice

Cecilia Grieco

Management and Law, University of Rome Tor

Vergata, Rome, Italy

Correspondence

Cecilia Grieco, University of Rome Tor Vergata,

Via Columbia, 2 - 00133 Rome, Italy.

Email: cecilia.grieco@uniroma2.it

The topic of social impact assessment (SIA) is growing

in importance, and this is especially true for social enter-

prises. The mission of solving social problems is the main

feature of these organizations; thus, the need to assess the

extent to which this mission is fulfilled becomes essential.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a conceptual

model that could explain the attitude–behavior gap in

SIA practice through the development of a coherence/dis-

placement matrix, to gauge if social entrepreneurs are

coherent in “walking their talks.”The study is based on a

mixed-methods approach focused on the Italian context.

An empirical quantitative analysis has been performed to

identify the misalignment between attitude and behavior.

The gaps that emerged are then analyzed through in-

depth interviews with social entrepreneurs, to provide a

pilot case study that could test the model and gain further

insights into how those gaps could be filled.

KEYWORDS

attitude–behavior gap, social entrepreneurs, social

entrepreneurship, social impact assessment

1|INTRODUCTION

In the field of studies on social entrepreneurship, much has been discussed about the process of

social impact assessment (SIA) (Costa & Pesci, 2016; Nicholls, 2009; OECD, 2015; Smith &

Stevens, 2010). This is because of the social mission organizations strive for, which makes the need

to measure the extent to which they are fulfilling their purpose ever more important. This aspect is

consistent with a wider trend in the nonprofit sector, where organizations cannot be driven only by

passionate individuals, rather the need for long-term success requires knowledge and application of

strategic management tools (Pandey, Kim, & Pandey, 2017).

Received: 21 March 2017 Revised: 30 January 2018 Accepted: 14 February 2018

DOI: 10.1002/nml.21310

Nonprofit Management and Leadership. 2018;29:105–122.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/nml © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 105

In social enterprises, entrepreneurial activity is leveraged to the fulfillment of a social mission.

Indeed, in these organizations, the social and entrepreneurial components are deeply merged, and

competing logics for governance, stakeholders, and outcomes must be balanced (Addae, 2018). Sim-

ilar to conventional entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship involves the provision of goods and

services. However, this is not an end in itself, but an integral part of an intervention to achieve

social objectives, thereby contributing to social change. The focus on economic activity is important

to differentiate social entrepreneurship from pure forms of social movements as well as from charita-

ble and philanthropic initiatives. However, the transformative social ambition distinguishes social

entrepreneurship from entrepreneurship with a conscience and other forms of “doing good,”such as

corporate social responsibility or corporate philanthropy (Mair, Battilana, & Cardenas, 2012).

The way these components are merged and valued, focusing more on one or the other, has deter-

mined the emergence of a great number of definitions, leaving Dees' description current today, even

if it dates back to almost 20 years ago: “Though the concept of social entrepreneurship is gaining

popularity, it means different things to different people”(Dees, 1998, p. 1). Indeed, scholars and

practitioners are far from reaching a consensus as to what this phenomenon actually means (Choi &

Majumdar, 2014). Different perspectives emerge concerning several issues, such as the field into

which social enterprises fall—the for-profit or the nonprofit sectors—(e.g., Simonov, Khamatkha-

nova, & Peshkova, 2014; Swanson & Zhang, 2010), the extent to which social entrepreneurs should

have specific skills and personalities compared to traditional entrepreneurs (e.g., Light, 2009;

Massetti, 2008), and the relationship between innovation and social entrepreneurship (e.g., Maas &

Grieco, 2017; OECD, 2010).

Nevertheless, there are some elements that are common across all the existing definitions

(Grieco, 2015). Most of all, in these kinds of organizations, the key aspect is no longer the prod-

ucts and services developed, but the purpose and ways in which the production is carried out,

where the main goal is the fulfillment of basic and long-standing needs (Certo & Miller, 2008).

The meaning given to the concept of social mission varies in scholars' view; however, despite the

forms it can take, social mission is generally recognized as being the goal that social enterprises

strive for, and a key dimension in identifying these organizations (Choi & Majumdar, 2014;

Nicholls & Cho, 2008). For this reason, SIA is of great importance for social enterprises, as the

pursuit of social value raises questions on how to evaluate its achievement (Chell, Nicolopou-

lou, & Karatas¸-Özkan, 2010; Clifford, Markey, & Malpani, 2013; Liket & Maas, 2015; OECD,

2015; Smith & Stevens, 2010). As for its aim, SIA is of relevance for both for-profit and non-

profit companies, as every business generates forms of societal and environmental impact. How-

ever, social enterprises are explicitly designed to create social value and to address social

challenges, and are therefore expected to produce a social impact (OECD, 2015), as well as being

pressured to do it (Nicholls, 2005).

The intent of the paper is to analyze the practice of SIA within social enterprises, adopting the

lens of the attitude–behavior gap theory (Sheeran, 2002). This theory expresses the misalignment

between beliefs and deeds in customers' purchasing intention. Accordingly, customers do not always

act on the basis of their attitude, revealing a gap between their intended and actual behavior. The

same principle was applied here to the intended and actual behavior of social entrepreneurs concern-

ing the process of assessing their social impact. This research aims to keep these two elements

together, analyzing both the attitude and the behavior of social entrepreneurs concerning SIA prac-

tice. The main purpose is to develop and test a conceptual model that could explain the misalign-

ment between attitude and behavior. This has involved two steps: (a) to gauge if coherence is

evident between intention and action; and (b) to understand the reasons for any displacement and

identify possible solutions.

106 GRIECO