PurposeSocial enterprises have proven to play a vital role in the transitions towards inclusive labour markets and sustainable economies. Yet, they often struggle to flourish within traditional economic systems due to the dual mission of pursuing social and commercial goals, leading to inherent tensions for social entrepreneurs. This study aims to explore tensions within Work Integration Social Enterprises (WISEs) arising from their dual mission and engagement withmultiple stakeholders.MethodologyInterviews with representatives from 10 Dutch WISEs were conducted to understand their day-to-day challenges. The typology by Smith and Lewis (2011), focusing on learning, belonging, organising, and performing tensions, was used for data analysis. FindingsThe study reveals tensions between social impact and commercial viability, withorganizational challenges being predominant. Also, there's an observed temporal pattern in tension prominence: early stages emphasize belonging, organising, and performing tensions, while learning tensions become more prominent as enterprises mature. OriginalityThis study offers insights into tensions within WISEs, highlighting the complexity of managing multiple identities in a multi-stakeholder context. By drawing on practical experiences, it contributes nuanced understanding to existing literature.
De paper beschrijft de theoretische onderbouwing van het model Professionaliteit en Persoonlijk Leiderschap zoals dat door Fontys Hogeschool Marketing Management gebruikt wordt in haar onderwijs. De paper is uitgereikt tijdens een presentatie over dit onderwerp op het jaarcongres van de HBO-raad 2009.
Purpose: This paper is a critical discussion of the Leiden Manifesto for libraries already engaged in bibliometric practices. It offers practical recommendations based on the work of the European Association for Research Libraries (LIBER) Working Group on Metrics. This work is in the beginning phase and summarizes literature on the topic as well as the experiences of the members of the Working Group. The discussion reflects today’s growing popularity of (quantitative) research assessment which is seen in enthusiasts introducing new metrics (i.e. altmetrics) and by critics demanding responsible metrics that increase objectivity and equity in evaluations.Design/methodology/approach: This paper is the result of the Working Group on Metrics of the European Association for Research Libraries (LIBER) that critically discussed the practicality of the Leiden Manifesto for libraries.Findings: Full compliance with the Manifesto is time-consuming, expensive and requires a significant increase in bibliometric expertise with respect to both staffing and skill level. Despite these apparent disadvantages, it is recommended that all libraries embrace the Manifesto’s principles. To increase practicality it is advised that libraries collaborate with researchers, management and other libraries at home and around the world to jointly design and provide services that can be reused within the library community.Originality/value: Libraries have increasingly been confronted with questions about research assessment, responsible metrics, and the role of digital products in evaluations and funding decisions. Although a wide range of recommendations and initiatives are available (e.g., DORA San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) many recommendations are not straightforward enough to be implemented from a library perspective. This paper provides assistance for libraries to implement these principles by acknowledging the heterogeneous backgrounds the libraries may stem from.https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-01-2017-0004
MULTIFILE
