{"title":"培育社会创业的机会指标建模:德尔菲和最佳-最差方法的混合。","authors":"Vineet Kaushik, Shobha Tewari","doi":"10.1007/s11205-023-03139-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Opportunity as a construct has been widely examined in for-profit entrepreneurship research, but it is scarcely studied in the context of social entrepreneurship. It is being observed that many entrepreneurs venture into social enterprise because they perceive it as an opportunity. This study aims to address this phenomenon by extensively identifying the opportunity indicators that promote entrepreneurs to pursue social entrepreneurship. We accomplish this by employing a mixed-methods approach wherein we used both quantitative and qualitative data from experts and analysed it using a hybrid approach of Delphi rounds and the best-worst method. We identified 13 opportunity indicators from the literature, and in the first round of Delphi, four new indicators were added to the list by a panel of 24 experts drawn from industry and academia across India. In the second round of the Delphi method, 18 of the 24 experts took part and rated the importance of each indicator on a 5-point Likert scale. Depending on the availability of the experts, both rounds of Delphi were held in person and virtually. Based on the cut-off levels for standard deviation, interquartile range, and probability of occurrence, experts agreed on 16 indicators. Furthermore, a best-worst method approach was used to prioritise these indicators based on the opinions of industry and academic experts. The study used a theoretical lens of entrepreneurial opportunity and its two different views: objectively discovered and subjectively perceived. The results revealed a consensus among academicians and practitioners for objectively discovered opportunity indicators, which gave the highest priority to \"institutional support\" and \"funding opportunities.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":21943,"journal":{"name":"Social Indicators Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-32"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10252175/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modeling Opportunity Indicators Fostering Social Entrepreneurship: A Hybrid Delphi and Best-Worst Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Vineet Kaushik, Shobha Tewari\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11205-023-03139-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Opportunity as a construct has been widely examined in for-profit entrepreneurship research, but it is scarcely studied in the context of social entrepreneurship. It is being observed that many entrepreneurs venture into social enterprise because they perceive it as an opportunity. This study aims to address this phenomenon by extensively identifying the opportunity indicators that promote entrepreneurs to pursue social entrepreneurship. We accomplish this by employing a mixed-methods approach wherein we used both quantitative and qualitative data from experts and analysed it using a hybrid approach of Delphi rounds and the best-worst method. We identified 13 opportunity indicators from the literature, and in the first round of Delphi, four new indicators were added to the list by a panel of 24 experts drawn from industry and academia across India. In the second round of the Delphi method, 18 of the 24 experts took part and rated the importance of each indicator on a 5-point Likert scale. Depending on the availability of the experts, both rounds of Delphi were held in person and virtually. Based on the cut-off levels for standard deviation, interquartile range, and probability of occurrence, experts agreed on 16 indicators. Furthermore, a best-worst method approach was used to prioritise these indicators based on the opinions of industry and academic experts. The study used a theoretical lens of entrepreneurial opportunity and its two different views: objectively discovered and subjectively perceived. The results revealed a consensus among academicians and practitioners for objectively discovered opportunity indicators, which gave the highest priority to \\\"institutional support\\\" and \\\"funding opportunities.\\\"</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Indicators Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10252175/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Indicators Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-023-03139-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Indicators Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-023-03139-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Modeling Opportunity Indicators Fostering Social Entrepreneurship: A Hybrid Delphi and Best-Worst Approach.
Opportunity as a construct has been widely examined in for-profit entrepreneurship research, but it is scarcely studied in the context of social entrepreneurship. It is being observed that many entrepreneurs venture into social enterprise because they perceive it as an opportunity. This study aims to address this phenomenon by extensively identifying the opportunity indicators that promote entrepreneurs to pursue social entrepreneurship. We accomplish this by employing a mixed-methods approach wherein we used both quantitative and qualitative data from experts and analysed it using a hybrid approach of Delphi rounds and the best-worst method. We identified 13 opportunity indicators from the literature, and in the first round of Delphi, four new indicators were added to the list by a panel of 24 experts drawn from industry and academia across India. In the second round of the Delphi method, 18 of the 24 experts took part and rated the importance of each indicator on a 5-point Likert scale. Depending on the availability of the experts, both rounds of Delphi were held in person and virtually. Based on the cut-off levels for standard deviation, interquartile range, and probability of occurrence, experts agreed on 16 indicators. Furthermore, a best-worst method approach was used to prioritise these indicators based on the opinions of industry and academic experts. The study used a theoretical lens of entrepreneurial opportunity and its two different views: objectively discovered and subjectively perceived. The results revealed a consensus among academicians and practitioners for objectively discovered opportunity indicators, which gave the highest priority to "institutional support" and "funding opportunities."
期刊介绍:
Since its foundation in 1974, Social Indicators Research has become the leading journal on problems related to the measurement of all aspects of the quality of life. The journal continues to publish results of research on all aspects of the quality of life and includes studies that reflect developments in the field. It devotes special attention to studies on such topics as sustainability of quality of life, sustainable development, and the relationship between quality of life and sustainability. The topics represented in the journal cover and involve a variety of segmentations, such as social groups, spatial and temporal coordinates, population composition, and life domains. The journal presents empirical, philosophical and methodological studies that cover the entire spectrum of society and are devoted to giving evidences through indicators. It considers indicators in their different typologies, and gives special attention to indicators that are able to meet the need of understanding social realities and phenomena that are increasingly more complex, interrelated, interacted and dynamical. In addition, it presents studies aimed at defining new approaches in constructing indicators.