Beyond taxonomy: An empirical validation of social entrepreneurship in the nonprofit sector
Abstract
Much of the considerable confusion about the definition of social entrepreneurship in academic literature stems from a lack of empirical research on the subject. This article advances social entrepreneurship research beyond conceptualization discussions by developing and validating an instrument that quantifies the incidence of nonprofit entrepreneurial behavior. Information from 145 Kansas City Metropolitan Area nonprofit organizations was collected to validate the underlying constructs represented in the instrument. Behavior differences were depicted between entrepreneurial and nonentrepreneurial nonprofits. Using principal component factor analysis, the research illustrates social entrepreneurship as a unique nonprofit behavior that occurs at the intersection of innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
According to organizational legitimacy theory, funding priorities are reflections of wider policy imperatives, which often have public support.
“According to organizational legitimacy theory, funding priorities are understood as reflections of wider policy imperatives, which often have public support (Helm & Andersson, 2010).”
From Understanding Government-Nonprofit Funding Agreements in Human Service Organizations Using Resource Dependence Theory and Organizational Legitimacy (2026) · cites this paper as Helm & Andersson, 2010
Cites
Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250100107 · Cited by 5,981 · see citing works
Reliability and Validity Assessment
Carmines, E., & Zeller, R. (1979) · doi:10.4135/9781412985642 · Cited by 5,884 · see citing works
The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms
Miller, D. (1983) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.29.7.770 · Cited by 5,853 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kassem, H. S., Aljuaid, M., Alotaibi, B. A., & Ghozy, R. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12177178 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
How can nonprofit boards innovate for growth? An <scp>integrative‐systematic</scp> review
Richardson, S., Kelly, S. J., & Gillespie, N. (2023) · Nonprofit Management and Leadership · doi:10.1002/nml.21563 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Turpin, A., & Shier, M. (2026) · Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs · doi:10.20899/jpna.far2t327
- Authors
- Helm, S. T., & Andersson, F. O.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
- Venue
- Nonprofit Management and Leadership
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-03
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 259-276
- ISSN
- 1048-6682 (ISSN-L)
- 1542-7854
- OpenAlex
- W1973179071
- Cited by
- 89
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Nonprofit Management and Leadership (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Community Development and Social Impact
- Keywords
- social entrepreneurship, nonprofit organizations, entrepreneurial behavior, scale development, innovation, proactive behavior, risk-taking, Kansas City metropolitan area
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review