Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

New business models for creating shared value

Michelini, Laura, Fiorentino, Daniela·2012·Social Responsibility Journal

Abstract

Purpose: For a long time, managing the relationship between business and society has been one of the main topics of academic and business literature. Porter and Kramer have proposed a new interpretation of this relationship based on the mutual dependence that exists between corporations and society. Trying to put into practice the shared value principle, for‐profit companies engaging in strategic CSR have chosen to implement new hybrid business models. These models include the social business model and the inclusive business model. The purpose of the paper is to understand which characteristics distinguish social and inclusive business models and what kind of benefits and risks (for companies and for communities) are connected to each model. Design/methodology/approach: In order to identify the features of the inclusive business and social business models and the benefits and risks associated with these models, ten case studies were analyzed. Analysis of the business models was based on a theoretical framework developed through the analysis of the literature. Findings: The findings of the research suggest two main conclusions. First, social and inclusive business models are similar in partner networks, use of knowledge and value chain, in the development of innovative distribution models (except for the cases in which the market considered is not in an emerging country) and in terms of social benefit. Second, the social and inclusive business models are different in terms of value proposition, governance systems, profits management model, social risks and economic profit equation. Research limitations/implications: The first limitation is that the case study analysis is based on documentary materials; for further investigation it might be useful to develop in‐depth interviews with key figures involved in the implementation of business models. Even though this descriptive study has allowed a first important step in taking a comparative analysis between the two business models, further research should strive to extend the analysis to all the hybrid business models that are being developed with the aim of creating shared value. Practical implications: The final propositions allow entrepreneurs and managers to better understand the characteristics of business models. Moreover, the theoretical framework is a conceptual instrument that is useful in analyzing and evaluating alternative ways to develop new business models – based on the “creating shared value” principle – in developing markets. Originality/value: The paper focuses on comparing the characteristics of the social versus inclusive business models. Studies that compare business models in the social venturing space are limited. Moreover, the study addresses the similarity and differences between the two business models rather than focusing on the two models separately as the previous researches have done.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/17471111211272129

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Michelini, L., & Fiorentino, D.
Venue
Social Responsibility Journal
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2012-09-28
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
561-577
ISSN
1747-1117 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015857536
Cited by
269
References
2
FWCI
24.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: New business models for creating shared value. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/17471111211272129
The paper
Michelini, L., & Fiorentino, D. (2012). New business models for creating shared value. Social Responsibility Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/17471111211272129

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.