Randomized trial investigates factors influencing social entrepreneurship across 26 countries, indicating different pathways to success.
Purpose This study aims to investigate how social entrepreneurship emerges from the combinations of entrepreneurial and prosocial drivers across multiple levels. It adopts a configurational approach to capture the hybrid and multilevel nature of social entrepreneurship, addressing the gap in research that has traditionally relied on linear, net-effect models. Design/methodology/approach Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, this study analyzes data from the 2015 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, which includes a dedicated module on social entrepreneurship, covering 26 countries across five stages of economic development. Six condition variables are selected to reflect the hybrid (entrepreneurial and prosocial) and multilevel (individual, organizational and institutional) structure of social entrepreneurship. Findings This study identifies two distinct configurations of conditions that lead to high levels of social entrepreneurship. Intrapreneurship and entrepreneurial self-perception consistently emerge as core conditions, while postmaterialism and societal equality preference function as interchangeable prosocial elements. The findings also highlight important differences between social and commercial entrepreneurship and show how these conditions vary across stages of economic development. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature by explaining the emergence of social entrepreneurship through a configurational lens that incorporates hybrid logics and multilevel conditions. It extends prior research by providing empirical evidence on how different combinations of factors work together to foster social entrepreneurship, and how these patterns differ from commercial entrepreneurship and across national contexts. The findings offer practical implications for policymakers and organizations in designing enabling ecosystems and context-sensitive, as well as societal implications for fostering inclusive, value-aligned environments that support social entrepreneurship.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nguyen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: