Research Article Published 24 January 2016

Managing Social and Economic Performance in Social Enterprise

How to Cite

How to Cite

Abdul Zalim, S. N., Abdul Khalid, S. N., & Azhar, Z. (2016). Managing Social and Economic Performance in Social Enterprise. Journal of Business Management and Accounting, 6(1), 47-73. https://doi.org/10.32890/jbma2016.6.1.8850
Siti Nazariah Abdul Zalim
Graduate School of Business, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Siti Nabiha Abdul Khalid
Graduate School of Business, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Zubir Azhar
School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Full text
PDF View full text 275 KB · 27 pages XML JATS full text 119 KB · machine readable HTML Read online 86 KB
DOI 10.32890/jbma2016.6.1.8850 Cite this article
Share this article
Citations
4
OpenAlex, highest of the sources checked
Reads
319 +1
Abstract + full text
Downloads
233 +4
PDF and XML
Percentile
88th
By citations, works of the same year

Article

Abstract

Social enterprise encounter has received enormous pressure to manage both social and economic objectives. This has given rise to tension in managing social and economic objectives leading to tension within the organisation. Failure to manage this tension and competing demands between these two objectives raise concerns toward mission drift issue. The paper discusses the conceptualisation of social enterprise and its competing demands,  and  the  analysis  of  normative  and  empirical  research  on  performance measurement system (PMS) and management control in social enterprise. From the normative  literature,  a  number  PMS  models  for  social  enterprise  were  advanced. However, there is lack of empirical research on management control and performance measurement  in  social  enterprise,  especially  regarding  the  ways  an  organisation designs and uses its PMS to achieve a balance between social and economic objectives. Hence, a qualitative method is recommended as a developing strategy for managing the competing demands since they are very much dependent on the manner organisational view and deal with the needs of the two objectives.

Keywords
Social enterprise hybrid organisations microfinance management control system performance measurement system (PMS)

Metrics & impact

Citations by source

Harvested 08-09-2026

Counts differ by index because each source crawls a different corpus. Crossref counts only registered reference lists; Google Scholar includes theses, preprints and grey literature.

OpenAlex
4
Open corpus, updated daily View →
OpenCitations
1
Open references only View →
Crossref
1
Deposited reference lists only View →
Scopus
0 Not indexed
Indexed titles only View →
Google Scholar
Publishes no citation count that can be read automatically.
Includes theses and preprints Search →
Dimensions
Publishes no citation count that can be read automatically.
Includes policy documents Search →

Citations over time

New citations recorded in each year, as reported by OpenAlex.

1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Reads & downloads

Abstract views 319
PDF downloads 233
XML downloads 0
Full-text HTML 0
Counted under COUNTER Release 5 rules; known robots excluded.

Attention beyond citation

Citation percentile 88th
Field-weighted citation impact 0.64
Works this article cites 61

From OpenAlex. A field-weighted impact of 1.00 is the world average for work of the same field, type and year. No Altmetric key is configured, so news, policy and social attention are not shown.

Identifiers
DOI · 10.32890/jbma2016.6.1.8850
OpenAlex · W2948942291

References

References 76
Deposited to Crossref with the article DOI
  1. Adams, C. A. (2002). Internal organisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting: Beyond current theorising. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 15(2), 223–250. http://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210418905
  2. Adams, C. A. (2004). The ethical, social and environmental reporting-performance portrayal gap. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 17. http://doi.org/10.1108/09513570410567791
  3. Amaratunga, D., & Baldry, D. (2002). Moving from performance measurement to performance management. Facilities, 20(5/6), 217–223. http://doi.org/10.1108/02632770210426701
  4. Arena, M., Azzone, G., & Bengo, I. (2014). Performance measurement for social enterprises. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 649–672. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-013-9436-8
  5. Ayayi, A. G., & Sene, M. (2008). What drives microfinance institution financial sustainability. Finance, 1–39.
  6. Bagnoli, L., & Megali, C. (2011). Measuring performance in social enterprises. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(1), 149–165. http://doi.org/10.1177/0899764009351111
  7. Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organisations :The case of commercial microfinance organisations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440.
  8. Berry, A. J., Coad, A. F., Harris, E. P., Otley, D. T., & Stringer, C. (2009). Emerging themes in management control: A review of recent literature. The British Accounting Review, 41(1), 2–20. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2008.09.001
  9. Bititci, U., Turner, T., & Begemann, C. (2000). Dynamics of performance measurement systems. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 20(6), 692–704. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/ abs/10.1108/01443570010321676
  10. Bourne, M., Neely, A., Mills, J., & Platts, K. (2003). Implementing performance measurement systems: A literature review. International Journal of Production Economics, 5(1), 1–24. http://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2003.002097
  11. Brignall, S., & Modell, S. (2000). An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the “new public sector.” Management Accounting Research, 11(June 1999), 281–306. http://doi.org/10.1006/ mare.2000.0136
  12. Bull, M. (2007). Balance: The development of a social enterprise business performance analysis tool. Social Enterprise Journal, 3(1), 49–66. http://doi.org/10.1108/17508610780000721
  13. Charitonenko, S., & Afwan, I. (2003). Commercialisation of microfinance. Best Practices Project, USAID, Washington, DC. http://doi.org/ISBN 971-561-506-6 68 Journal of Business Management and Accounting, 6(1) 2016: 47-
  14. Conaty, F. J. (2012). Performance management challenges in Hybrid NPO/public sector settings: An Irish case. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61(3), 290–309. http://doi.org/10.1108/17410401211205650
  15. Contrafatto, M., & Burns, J. (2013). Social and environmental accounting, organisational change and management accounting: A processual view. Management Accounting Research, 24(4), 349–365. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2013.10.004
  16. Copestake, J. (2007). Mainstreaming microfinance: Social performance management or mission drift? World Development, 35(10), 1721–1738. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. worlddev.2007.06.004
  17. Cornforth, C. (2014). Understanding & combating mission drift in social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal, 10(1), 3–20. http://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-09-2013-0036
  18. Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14(4), 411–424.
  19. Deegan, C. (2002). The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures - a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 15. http://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435852
  20. DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
  21. Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organisations: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16, 417–436. http://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12028
  22. Dunn, M., & Jones, C. (2010). Institutional logics and institutional pluralism : The contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967-2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55, 114–149.
  23. Durden, C. (2008). Towards a socially responsible management control system. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 21(5), 671–694. http://doi.org/10.1108/09513570810872969
  24. Ebrahim, A., Battilana, J., & Mair, J. (2014). The governance of social enterprises: Mission drift and accountability challenges in hybrid organisations. Research in Organisational Behaviour, 34, 81–100. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. riob.2014.09.001
  25. Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, K. (2010). The limits of nonprofit impact: A contingency framework for measuring social performance. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 10-099, May 2010.
  26. Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2014). What impact? A framework for measuring the scale and scope of social performance. University of California, 56(3). Retrieved from papers3://publication/uuid/4BFED026-38CE-4332-8753-2AC76BA9511E
  27. Epstein, M. J., & Yuthas, K. (2010). Mission impossible: Diffusion and drift in the microfinance industry. Sustainability Accounting, Management, and Policy Journal, 1(2), 201–221. http://doi.org/10.1108/20408021011089248
  28. Epstein, M. J., & Yuthas, K. (2011). Protecting and regaining clarity of mission in the microfinance industry. SustainabilityAccounting, Management, and Policy Journal, 2(2), 322–330. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20408021111185439
  29. Fitzgerald, L, Johnston, R, Brignall, S, Silvestro, R. & Voss, C. (1991), Performance Measurement in Service Businesses, CIMA, Black Bear Press Ltd. King’s Hedges Road, Cambridge.
  30. Friedland, R., & Alford, R. (1991). Bringing society bank in: Symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis (pp. 232–263). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  31. Gray, R. (2001). Social and environmental responsibility, sustainability and accountability: Can the corporate sector deliver? The Corporate Citizen, 2(3), 9–16.
  32. Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E., & Lounsbury, M., (2011). Institutional complexity and organisational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(June 2012), 37–41. http://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2 011.590299
  33. Hubbard, G. (2009). Measuring organisational performance: Beyond the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18(December 2006), 177–191. http://doi.org/Doi 10.1002/Bse.564
  34. Hulme, D., & Maitrot, M. (2014). Has microfinance lost its moral compass? Economic and Political Weekly, xlix(48), 77–86. http://doi.org/citeulike-article-id:13936422
  35. Islamic Finance Review. (2015). Interview with Dr Zubir Harun, Chairman of Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia. Editorial September 2015. Retrieved from http://isfire.net/dr-zubir-harun-chairman-amanah-ikhtiar-malaysia/ 70 Journal of Business Management and Accounting, 6(1) 2016: 47-
  36. Lander, M. W., Koene, B. A. S., & Linssen, S. N. (2013). Committed to professionalism: Organisational responses of mid-tier accounting firms to conflicting institutional logics. Accounting, Organisations, and Society, 38(2), 130–148. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2012.11.001
  37. Ledgerwood, J., Earne, J., & Nelson, C. (2013). The New Microfinance Handbook. World Bank. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
  38. Luke, B., Barraket, J., & Eversole, R. (2013). Measurement as legitimacy versus legitimacy of measures: Performance evaluation of social enterprise. Qualitative Research in Accounting and Management, 10(3), 234–258. http://doi.org/10.1108/ QRAM-08-2012-0034
  39. Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2008). Management control systems as a package— Opportunities, challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19(4), 287–300. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2008.09.003
  40. Mason, C., Azmi, W. N. W., & Madden, R. (2015). Aiming for greater financial inclusion through sustainable development : The story of AIM (Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia). Asian Institute of Finance.
  41. Mason, C., & Doherty, B. (2015). A fair trade-off ? Paradoxes in the governance of fair-trade Social Enterprises. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–19. http://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-014-2511-2
  42. Mason, C., Kirkbride, J., & Bryde, D. (2007). From stakeholders to institutions: The changing face of social enterprise governance theory. Management Decision, 45(2), 284–301. http://doi.org/10.1108/00251740710727296
  43. Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
  44. Modell, S. (2012). The politics of the balanced scorecard. Journal of Accounting and Organisational Change, 8(4), 475–489. http://doi.org/10.1108/18325911211273482
  45. Muhammad, A. I. (2015). Social accounting. In Social compliance accounting: Managing legitimacy in global supply chains (pp. 11–18). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09997-2
  46. Norris, G., & O’Dwyer, B. (2004). Motivating socially responsive decision making: The operation of management controls in a socially responsive organisation. The British Accounting Review, 36(2), 173–196. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. bar.2003.11.004
  47. O’Dwyer, B. (2005). Stakeholder Democracy: Challenges And Contributions From Social. http:/www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2005.00384.x/abstract
  48. Pache, A., & Santos, F. (2011). Inside the hybrid organisation: An organisational level view of responses to conflicting institutional demands (ESSEC Working Paper 1101).
  49. Pache, A. C., & Santos, F. (2010). When worlds collide : The internal dynamics of organisational responses. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 455–476. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2010.51142368
  50. Parker, L. L. D. (2005). Social and environmental accountability research: A view from the commentary box. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 18. http://doi.org/10.1108/09513570510627739
  51. Paton, R. (2003). Managing and Measuring Social Enterprsie. New York: Sage Publications.
  52. Pawlak, K., & Matul, M. (2004). Realising mission objectives: A promising approach to measuring the social performance of microfinance institutions. Journal of Microfinance/ESR Review, 6(2), 1–26. Retrieved from https://ojs.lib.byu.edu/ spc/index.php/ESR/article/view/1453
  53. Peattie, K., & Morley, A. (2008). Social enterprises: Diversity and dynamics, context and contributions - A Research Monograph.
  54. Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2005). The recomposition of an organisational field: Health care in Alberta. Organisation Studies, 26(3), 351–384. http://doi.org/10.1177/0170840605050872
  55. Reay, T., & Hinings, R. (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organisation Studies, 30(6), 629–652. http://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609104803
  56. Riccaboni, A., & Leone, E. L. (2010). Implementing strategies through management control systems: The case of sustainability. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 59, 130–144. http://doi.org/10.1108/17410401011014221
  57. Santos, F., Pache, A. C., & Birkholz, C. (2015). Making Hybrids work: Aligning business models and organisational design for social enterprises. California Management Review, 57(3), 36–59. http://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2015.57.3.36 72 Journal of Business Management and Accounting, 6(1) 2016: 47-
  58. Scapens, R. W., & Varoutsa, E. (2010). Accounting in Inter-organisational relationships : The institutional theory perspective. In Accounting in Networks (pp. 314–343). Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203854310
  59. Scarlata, M., Kimmitt, J., & Dimov, D. (2013). Microfinance institutions as social entrepreneurs: When do they fulfil a social mission? Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 33(18), 1–40.
  60. Simanowitz. A. (2003). Microfinance, poverty and social performance: Overview. IDS Bulletin, 34(4), 1–9.
  61. Sinha, F. (2006). Social rating and social performance reporting in microfinance. Argidius Foundation, 1–16.
  62. Smith, W. K. Gonin, M., & Besharov, M. L. (2013). Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(3), 407–442. http://doi.org/10.5840/beq201323327
  63. Somers, A. B. (2005). Shaping the balanced scorecard for use in UK social enterprises. Social Enterprise Journal, 1(1), 43–56. http://doi.org/10.1108/17508610580000706
  64. Speckbacher, G. (2003). The economics of performance management in nonprofit organisations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 13(3), 267–281. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-011-0537-8
  65. Steven, P., & Sunley, P. (2015). Social enterprise and neoinstitutional theory. Social Enterprise Journal, 11(3), 303–320.
  66. Stevens, R., Moray, N., & Bruneel, J. (2014). The social and economic mission of social enterprises: Dimensions, measurement, validation, and relation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 1–32. http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12091
  67. Suchman, M. (2005). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(June), 571–610.
  68. Taticchi, P., Tonelli, F., & Cagnazzo, L.K. (2010). Performance measurement and management: A literature review and a research agenda. Measuring Business Excellence, 14(1), 4–18. http://doi.org/10.1108/13683041011027418
  69. Teasdale, S. (2012). Negotiating tensions: How do social enterprises in the homelessness field balance social and commercial considerations? Housing Studies, 27(4), 514–532. http://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2012.677015
  70. The Consultative Group to Assist the Poor. (n.d.). Frequently asked questions about financial inclusion. Retrieved from http://www.cgap.org/about/faq
  71. Thornton, P. H. (2002). The rise of the corporation in a craft industry : Conflict and conformity in institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 81–101.
  72. Thornton, P. H. & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organisations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105(3), 801–843. http://doi.org/10.1086/210361
  73. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional logics. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, and K. Sahlin-Andersson (Eds.), The sage handbook of organisational institutionalism (pp. 99–129). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
  74. Thornton, P., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective a new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  75. Watts, T., & McNair-Connolly, J. C. (2012). New performance measurement and management control systems. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 13(3), 226–241. http://doi.org/10.1108/09675421211281308
  76. Woller, G. (2007). Trade-offs between social and financial performance. ESR Review, 9(2), 14.

Most read articles by the same author(s)