An Explorative and Descriptive Investigation of
“Social Entrepreneurs’” Narrative Constructions of Temselves
EN EKSPLORATIV OG DESKRIPTIV UNDERSØGELSE AF
“SOCIALE IVÆRKSÆTTERES” NARRATIVE KONSTRUKTIONER AF SIG SELV
Copenhagen Business School 2015
Cand.merc.(psyk.) • Master’s Tesis Written by Sonja Zimmermann
Supervised by Didde Maria Humle • Handed in 18th March 2015 • 181.644 Characters • 80 Standard Pages
Abstract
Denne kandidatafandling har til hensigt, at bidrage med viden om socialt iværksætteri (SE) fra et
psykologisk perspektiv ved at tilføje nuancerede forståelser om individet bag SE; den sociale iværksætter
(SEI). Til dette formål fokuserer jeg på SEIes narrative konstruktioner af sig selv og tager udgangspunkt i
dybdegående narrative interviews med tre tyske SEIe. Disse undersøger jeg gennem en iterativ, dialogisk
proces, hvor jeg inddrager lignende undersøgelser om SEIe, litteratur om narrativ analyse og narrativ
identitetsforskning.
Igennem denne undersøgelse konstaterer jeg, at de tre SEIes forståelser af sig selv er pluralistiske og
ambivalente i forhold til forskellige temaer - f.eks. at være SEI, klassisk iværksætter og at tage sig af andres
velvære, bæredygtighed og dyrevelfærd. Jeg beskriver ligeledes, hvordan de SEIe forstår sig selv og deres
handlen både igennem andre personer og i en varetagende funktion. Endvidere er de tres fortællinger om sig
selv og deres aktiviteter præget af problemer såsom divergerende ønsker og krav, der implicerer tvivl og
forandringer samt behov for kompromis. Jeg konstaterer dog også, at de balancerer sådanne fortællinger ved
at fremhæve sig selv som aktive, i stand til at fnde løsninger og med et positivt syn på fremtiden. Desuden
belyser jeg, at de tre italesætter aspekter som tilfældighed, held og de rette omstændigheder, hvilke de anser
som værende grundlæggende for både deres egen udvikling som SEI og deres aktiviteter. Dog anskueliggør
jeg samtidig, at de SEIe, på trods af disse paralleller, er meget forskellige i deres narrative konstruktioner.
Med udgangspunkt i mine konklusioner mener jeg, at fremtidige undersøgelser burde udføres med en
større sensibilitet for de SEIes heterogenitet og deres udfordringer. Dette er nødvendigt, for at de SEIe kan
understøttes i udfoldelsen af deres potentiale i at fremme social og økologisk forandring. Derudover burde
defnitoriske overvejelser - især i bestemmelsen af SE og SEI som underkategorier af klassisk iværksætteri - i
første omgang spille en underordnet rolle. Dette anser jeg som værende essentiel, for at undgå en for tidlig
lukning af feltet, hvilket kunne føre til en indskrænkning af SE og de SEIes forandringsevner.
1
Table of Content
Abstract................................................................................................................................................................................1
Table of Content..................................................................................................................................................................2
1.
2.
3.
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................4
1.1.
Research Questions......................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2.
Reading Guidance........................................................................................................................................................... 6
Literature Review.........................................................................................................................................................7
2.1.
Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship..................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.
Diverse Defnitions and Foci in Social Entrepreneurship Research.........................................................................8
2.3.
Position and Delimitations of the Tesis..................................................................................................................... 9
2.4.
Research on Social Entrepreneurs with Narrative Approaches..............................................................................10
Teoretical Assumptions and Emphases of the Tesis.............................................................................................13
3.1.
Anti-Essentialism, Meaning and Language............................................................................................................... 13
3.2.
Identity and Self............................................................................................................................................................ 14
3.3.
Narrative Identity Research........................................................................................................................................ 15
3.4.
Narratives...................................................................................................................................................................... 16
3.5.
Narratives as Praxis...................................................................................................................................................... 16
3.6.
4.
3.5.1.
Narratives as Socially Situated Actions........................................................................................................ 18
3.5.2.
Narratives as Identity Performances............................................................................................................ 18
3.5.3.
Narratives as Fusions of Form and Content............................................................................................... 19
Four Emphases............................................................................................................................................................. 20
3.6.1.
Identity Claims and Positionings.................................................................................................................. 20
3.6.2.
Functions of Other People............................................................................................................................. 21
3.6.3.
Difculties........................................................................................................................................................ 22
3.6.4.
Happenstances................................................................................................................................................ 23
Methodology...............................................................................................................................................................24
4.2.
4.3.
Case Study..................................................................................................................................................................... 25
4.2.1.
Contact to the "Social Entrepreneurs".......................................................................................................... 26
4.2.2.
Presentation of the "Social Entrepreneurs".................................................................................................. 26
Qualitative Interviews as Method............................................................................................................................... 28
4.3.1.
Narrative Interview Approach...................................................................................................................... 29
4.3.2.
Interview Guide and Pilot............................................................................................................................. 29
2
4.3.3.
4.4.
4.5.
5.
Analytical Approach..................................................................................................................................................... 32
4.4.1.
Transcription and Translation...................................................................................................................... 32
4.4.2.
Tree Narrative Analytical Perspectives...................................................................................................... 33
4.4.3.
Vertical and Horizontal Investigation......................................................................................................... 34
Refection on the Tesis’s Approach and Evaluation............................................................................................... 35
Analysis.......................................................................................................................................................................38
5.1.
6.
Interview Conduction.................................................................................................................................... 32
Identity Claims and Positionings............................................................................................................................... 38
5.1.1.
Creativity and Design..................................................................................................................................... 38
5.1.2.
Social Entrepreneurship and Non-Governmental Organisations............................................................42
5.1.3.
Entrepreneurship, Business and Proft......................................................................................................... 44
5.1.4.
Caring about Others and Empowerment.................................................................................................... 46
5.1.5.
Sustainability, Ecology and Animal Protection........................................................................................... 51
5.2.
Functions of Other People.......................................................................................................................................... 53
5.3.
Difculties..................................................................................................................................................................... 56
5.4.
Happenstances.............................................................................................................................................................. 63
Discussions and Conclusions....................................................................................................................................67
6.1.
Summary and Discussion of the Four Emphases..................................................................................................... 67
6.1.1.
Identity Claims and Positionings ................................................................................................................. 67
6.1.2.
Functions of Other People............................................................................................................................. 70
6.1.3.
Difculties........................................................................................................................................................ 71
6.1.4.
Happenstances................................................................................................................................................. 73
6.2. "Social Entrepreneurs’" Narrative Constructions of Temselves...............................................................................73
7.
Implications, Limitations and Future Research.......................................................................................................74
List of Literature................................................................................................................................................................79
Appendix............................................................................................................................................................................87
Appendix I.
Defnitions of Te Social Entrepreneur and Social Entrepreneurship....................................................87
Appendix II.
Notes on Pilot Conversation....................................................................................................................... 90
Appendix III.
Letter of Request.......................................................................................................................................... 99
Appendix IV.
Assertion of Information and Anonymity Protection.........................................................................101
Appendix V.
Interview Guide.......................................................................................................................................... 102
Appendix VI.
Notes on the Interviews............................................................................................................................ 114
Appendix VII.
Transcription Keys.................................................................................................................................. 126
Appendix VIII.
Transcribed Interviews.......................................................................................................................... 127
3
1. Introduction
Awareness in Social Entrepreneurship (SE) has been rising steadily in the last decades. Tis interest in SE is
settled in the conjecture, that it ofers a path towards positive social change ( Seelos, Ganly & Mair, 2006;
Perrini & Vurro, 2006).
If such an assumption is adopted, it should be of desire to develop ways to support SE, so that its ascribed
change potential can be unfolded (Dey and Steyart, 2012). A thorough understanding of the particular
processes and individuals involved is a pre-condition for supporting and facilitating changes (Weick &
Quinn, 1999; Campbell & Hufngton, 2008). Te problem is that due to its newness, a broader
comprehension of this phenomenon is still lacking. Both in regard to SE in general and the individual
engaged in it, i.e. the social entrepreneur (SEI) (Volkmann, Tokarski & Ernst, 2012; Mair, Robinson &
Hockerts, 2006, 2010).
Terefore, this thesis intends to contribute to the knowledge on SEIs, by adding subtle nuances and by
pluralising the understandings of SEIs, from a psychological stance. Based on anti-essentialism assumptions,
as within a social constructionism perspective, I consider understandings of cultures, phenomenon, and
artefacts and in particular, identities as multiple, polyphonic and continuously socially negotiated
constructions. For the purpose of this thesis I therefore place the language-in-use, as the process whereby
these constructions come into being, into focus (Bruner, 1991; Gergen, 1997; Mishler, 1999). I turn detailed
attention to the SEIs’ narratives and build on similar previous research and inspiration from the feld of
narrative identity research in order to explore and describe how SEIs construct their identity. I use such a
narrative approach, as it allows to generate insights which build on SEIs’ own meaning makings concerning
themselves and their activities in relation to SE (Mishler, 1999; Riessmann, 2008; Czarniawska, 2004). Such
insights are so far very limited in the state of the art research on SEIs (Dey and Steyart, 2012; Parkinson &
Howorth, 2008; Jones, Latham & Betta, 2007). Furthermore, this type of approach facilitates sensibility to the
ambivalent, contradictory and pluralistic comprehensions the SEIs might have in regard of themselves and
their activities (Mishler, 1999; Riessmann, 2008; Czarniawska, 2004). Tis is of value, to the extent that it
generates subtle discernments and ofers a way to be critical towards the sole replication of one-sided,
unambiguously positive stories about the SEI (Dey & Steyart, 2012).
4
1.1. Research Questions
Based on interest to generate nuanced understandings of how SEIs make sense of themselves and their
activities while being engaged in SE, I formulated a broad and open question which is guiding this thesis:
•
How do "social entrepreneurs" narratively construct themselves?
In order to tackle this explorative and descriptive question I pursue an iterative (Rasmussen, Østergaard &
Beckmann, 2006; Nygaard, 2012) dialogical process (Humle, 2013). I conducted in-depth narrative interviews
with three German based SEIs. For the investigation of this empirical material, I moved back and forth
between the interviews, previous research on SEIs with a narrative approach, literature on narrative analysis
and from the feld of narrative identity research.
For the purpose at hand, Mishler’s (1999) work on crafartists is a valuable source of inspiration. I
evaluate Mishler’s conceptualisation of Narratives of Praxis as an encompassing, well-founded theoretical
framework, by which I particularise my comprehension of the relation between identity and narratives.
Defning narratives as praxis means that my investigations are based on the assumption of narratives as
socially situated actions, as identity performances and as fusions of form and content (Mishler, 1999).
Albeit, Mishler’s (1999) work also presents an empirical study, which centres around four focus areas. I
adjudge that these foci enclose what I found through the exploration of the empirical material and that they
echo the concerns of similar previous research on SEIs. Tus, I take some of the concepts and theories that
Mishler applies to his four foci, as a lens and vocabulary to describe how the SEIs construct themselves. Based
on this I formulated four emphases which aid me in approaching the overall research question:
•
Which identity claims and positionings do "social entrepreneurs" construct?
•
Which functions do " social entrepreneurs" construct in relation to other people?
•
Which difculties do " social entrepreneurs" construct?
•
Which happenstances do " social entrepreneurs" construct?
Tese emphases enable me to describe the individuals’ narrations about themselves with attention to their
uniqueness, ambivalences and contradictions. Simultaneously they give an overall frame, by which I can
relate the individuals’ narratives to each other and discuss the hereby generated insights in the light of
5
previous research.
1.2. Reading Guidance
In order to increase the readers’ comprehension of how I answer the overall research question throughout
the thesis, I draf the structure prefatory.
Te following Chap. 2 gives an introduction and an overview on SE, the SEI and the current debate
surrounding the subjects. Based on this, I outline the thesis’ position and which delimitations this implies.
Having defned this, I turn to a more detailed review on research with a focus on the SEI and a narrative
approach and explain how the thesis builds and extends on this.
Chap. 3 presents the theoretical assumptions which the thesis investigation rests on. In order to explicate
these, and their anchorage in social sciences, I start with an elaboration of my anti-essentialism perspective
and its implication for the view on meaning and language. Tis serves as a base to describe my
comprehension of identity and self, leading to the explanation of why I draw from the feld of narrative
identity research. Aferwards I elucidate my defnition of narratives and clarify their relation to identity,
which I do by presenting Mishler’s specifcation of Narratives of Praxis (1999). Hereupon I explain how I
utilised Mishler’s work on the formulation of the four emphases.
Afer these theoretical deliberations, Chap. 4 describes the methodology that I availed in the interest of
this thesis. To understand my methodological and analytical choices, I start with an elaboration on the
scientifc theoretical position in social constructionism. Grounding in this, I explicate and discuss why I
chose a case study, interviews as a method and a narrative analytical approach. Having outlined both the
theoretical assumptions and the methodology, makes it possible to move to refections on the dialogical
process as pursued in the thesis and how the thesis can be evaluated.
Chap. 5 presents my analysis of the interview accounts. Te chapter is divided into four sections, each
related to one of the four emphases. Chap. 6 summarises and discusses the analysis and relates it to previous
research on SEIs with a narrative approach. On these grounds I answer the main research question. Afer the
conclusion, I use the fnal Chap. 7, in order to resonate on the thesis’ implications for the knowledge of SEIs
and SE. Furthermore I anticipate some of the thesis’ limitations and how these can be an ofspring for future
research.
6
2. Literature Review
In this chapter I give an introduction and an overview on SE and the current debate surrounding the subject.
It intends to clarify how researchers think about and study SE and SEIs and prepares the reader for the
following part on the thesis’ positioning and delimitation. Building on this, I move to a review of current
research on the SEI that takes a narrative approach and anticipates how the thesis draws upon this stream of
literature.
2.1. Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship
Some scholars claim the phenomenon of SE to have been present in our society throughout history, albeit
under diferent names, i.e. “visionaries, humanitarians, philanthropists, reformers, saints, or simply great
leaders” (Bornstein & Davis, 2010; p. 2). However, the term SE came into use in the US and UK throughout
the 80s, while what is meant by it, is an occurrence that cannot be ascribed only within the borders of these
two countries (Hockerts, 2006a). Known examples are the Indian Grameen Bank or BRAC in Bangladesh,
both supporting and encouraging small business growth by ofering microcredits (Huybrechts & Nicholls,
2012; Mair & Schoen, 2006).
Considering developed countries, researchers agree that the uprising of SE among others causes, can be
seen as the result of two macro-dynamics in the 1980s; the crisis of the traditional welfare state system
together with an increase in competitive pressure within the non-proft sector (Perrini & Vurro, 2006). Most
countries have experienced, to a certain degree, a slowdown in economic growth rates and increased
unemployment. Tis led to reconsiderations of social services, resulting in large gaps in the network of social
needs (Volkmann et al., 2012) and a wave of privatization, by providers with altered, more efcient and
efective management practices (Perrini & Vurro, 2006). Meanwhile, competing public providers were
encouraged to use a more managerial approach to meet the diferent social demands. Tis development is
labelled and known as New public management (Huybrechts & Nicholls, 2012).
To some extent related, fnancial support of Non-Proft (NPO), Non-Governmental (NGO) and other
civil society organisations have declined. Moreover globalization and the digital interconnectivity caused an
expanded, global competition among them. Both aspects drove these organisations to reinvent themselves
and to fnd new, ofen entrepreneurial, market-oriented ways to operate (Perrini & Vurro, 2006; Huybrechts &
7
Nicholls, 2012).
In addition to what has already been pointed out above, the increasing environmental and health crises
together with the increased global awareness of this kind of subject are also deemed to have boosted the
emergence of SE. Nonetheless, the occurrence of SE is not only said to be caused by demands, but also by
supply; due to increase in per capita wealth, better education and improved global communication (Nicholls,
2006).
2.2. Diverse Defnitions and Foci in Social Entrepreneurship Research
Academic attention to SE was rather sporadic until the end of the 90s and the feld is in its infantry, lacking
consensual understanding (Pirrini & Vurro, 2010; Volkmann et al., 2012).
In regard to developed countries, the defnitions of SE difer depending on whether it represents an Anglo
or a Western European sphere of analysis. In the former case, SE is understood to be settled within a
distinctive institutional environment and with an assumption of operational processes merging in the vein of
traditional business entrepreneurs. In contrast, in the second, SE is seen as being situated in a complex social
environment related to the governmental, civil society and the non-proft sphere. . As a consequence of these
diferent comprehensions, it is argued that SE should be conceptualised on a continuum that ranges from
purely business objects on one side, to purely social objects on the other 1 (Desa, 2010; Douglas, 2010;
Huybrechts & Nicholls, 2012).
Roughly speaking, researchers can be categorized as upholders of a narrow or a widened SE understanding
(Perrini & Vurro, 2010; Mair & Noboa, 2006; Huybrechts & Nicholls, 2012). Supporters of the narrow
position consider SE as subcategory of commercial business entrepreneurship (BE) just with a more social,
non-proft orientation (Perrini & Vurro, 2010). Terefore, they believe SE should be approached with
theories, which have proven useful in the feld of BE. Te main argument for this is that already Schumpeter
(1934, in Mair, 2006) - one of the main pioneers and contributors in the feld of BE - highlighted the social
value of BE, by creating employment, vitalizing innovation, and eventually increasing tax revenue.
Contrary to that, exponents of the widened position do not believe SE to be only a subfeld of BE. In
saying this, they make use of Schumpeter’s argumentations as well (1934, in Mair, 2006). Schumpeter reasons
that the ability to generate social value is considered possible only when entrepreneurs channel their energy
frst and foremost towards generating economic value (ibid.). Exponents of the widened position argue that
1 See Appendix I. Defnitions of Te Social Entrepreneur and Social Entrepreneurship - Figure 1.: Spectrum of SE initiatives
8
SEIs are moved by diferent values and intentions though. Furthermore, they content that SE-initiatives take
their ofspring in the discovery and pursuance of diferent kinds of (business) opportunities (Ibid, Robinson,
2006). Diferent to that the benefts that BE can bring to the overall society - identifed by Schumpeter - are
indeed an indirect result of doing business and come secondary to the BE fnal aim of making proft ( Mair &
Noboa, 2006; Huybrechts & Nicholls, 2012). Having said that, SE and BE may both generate economic value,
but they difer in the sense that SE has a valuable social and ecological activity as its main objective.
Following the widened perspective, SE should therefore be treated as a new inter-sectorial research object
with the need for diversifed and interdisciplinary research approaches, also from felds such as sociology and
psychology (Mair & Noboa, 2006; Mair & Martí, 2004; Perrini & Vurro, 2006, 2010; Austin, 2006).
Another aspect that contributes to the creation of multiple defnitions can be found in the way research on SE
has been carried out so far with diferent foci, i.e. the people, process, opportunity recognition, and on
diferent levels, i.e. individual, organisational and inter organisational (Hockerts, 2006a; Desa, 2010)2.
Literature reviews on the topic highlight four main tendencies in current research ( Nicholls & Cho, 2006;
Hockerts, 2006a; Desa, 2010). One research stream attempts to defne the feld of SE and treat it as a unique
phenomenon of study. Tis is ofen pursued through research on distinctive characteristics and values of
individuals engaged in SE in comparison to those engaged in BE. In the second stream, the focus is on the
resource-constrained environments within which social enterprises operate and how they acquire and utilize
the resources needed to serve their social mission. Another stream addresses the constraining and enabling
role of institutions, such as governance mechanisms and external regulatory actions. Te last stream focuses
on the development of performance metrics by which SE’s impact can be measured (Ibid.).
2.3. Position and Delimitations of the Tesis
Te forgone elaborations made clear that it is necessary to specify this thesis’ positioning and delimitations.
I apply a widened defnition of SE, as the thesis extends on research settled in such a conceptualisation. In
doing so, I draw inspiration from narrative theories, approaches and analysis from the feld of narrative
identity research. Tis means I rely on methodologies and theories from a feld other than BE, which
furthermore are characterized by a strong interdisciplinary origin (Riessman, 2008). Te widened position
also implies that I use no defnition of the SEI. So not to become restricted, I build on the empirical
2 See Appendix I. Defnitions of Te Social Entrepreneur and Social Entrepreneurship
9
occurrence, where SEIs are identifed as such (Mair & Noboa, 2006; Huybrechts & Nicholls, 2012, Dey &
Steyaert, 2012; Parkinson & Howorths, 2008). Te prominence of this on the selection of the three German
SEIs is explained in the corresponding section in chap. 4’s methodology 3.
Te focus is on the SEI, hence the thesis is located in the mentioned frst research stream. However, I do
not intend to conduct a comparative investigation between SEIs and BEs, or to engage in the debate on the
defnition of SE or the SEI. Contributions to such questions are only gained through a greater understanding
of the individuals’ own constructions of themselves as SEIs. Furthermore does this focus mean that aspects
which are related to the other three research streams are not the centre of my investigations and that I am
attentive to such only in the manner in which they are of relevance for the SEIs themselves.
Having clarifed the position and the focus of this thesis, I turn to a more specifc review of the main
publications that focus on the SEI and use a narrative approach.
2.4. Research on Social Entrepreneurs with Narrative Approaches
Firstly, I introduce Dey and Steyaert, as their work is the most ample. Teir discussions of research on SE and
the SEI explain the importance and value of my decision to pursue a narrative approach. Second, I present
the few previous studies on the SEI with such an approach. Each is outlined regarding their methodology,
main fndings and call for further research, whereby parallels and diference among them are specifed.
In their work, Dey and Steyaert (Dey 2008, 2010; Dey & Steyaert, 2010a, 2010b, 2012) argue, that the
immanent positive embracement of the phenomenon SE has led to an almost identical representation in
academics as in the media. Te euphoria has created images of the SEIs as heroic and extraordinary
individuals and their activities are portrayed as easier, more harmonious and less conficting than they
usually are. Dey and Steyaert reason, that this might be caused by the fact that in current research, SEIs’ own
views have been acknowledged little (2012). Consequently, they advocate for more critical approaches in the
study of SE and the SEI. Only through questioning the taken-for-granted knowledge and positive myths, can
the understanding of SE and the SEI be expanded. Tey therefore argue, that approaches are of utter
importance, which are attentive to the complexity and ambiguity SEIs face in their activities. At least if the
aim of SEIs - to defy social and ecological problems, which mostly are highly complex and ambivalent - is to
3 Outlined in the forthcoming 4.2. Case Study
10
be taken seriously (Dey, 2010). Moreover, research needs to be conducted with sensitivity to the
heterogeneity present among SEIs (Dey & Steyaert, 2010a). By doing that, the chances that SE can unfold its
full potential are likely to increase (Dey & Steyaert, 2010b). In order to engage in the creation of greater
possibilities for enactment of the phenomenon, Dey and Steyaert hail for investigations that create semantic
openings and multiplications of how the SEI is understood (2012). For this purpose, they encourage to
conduct explorative and empirical investigations with language-based approaches so as to gain insights on
how SEIs make sense of themselves and their activities (Dey, 2008; Dey & Steyaert, 2012).
Frogget and Chamberlayne (2007) apply narrative analysis on a biographical interview with an individual in
a community development setting. One of their main fndings is that their respondent’s account is
constructed around two diferent stories. One being what they describe as the classic tale of SE (p. 70), a story
which is easily digestible for the press and public. A story of a charismatic, visionary leader, with an
enormous will to drive things forward and who miraculously develops a project out of almost nothing.
Contrary to this, the second story is defned by evolution, driven by difculties and failure, based on fragility,
dependency and values of human caring. Based on their fndings, they call for repetitions of their study with
SEIs active in diferent settings.
Jones, Latham and Betta (2007) conduct a narrative analysis on a single narrative interview, with what they
call an ideological inclined SEI (p. 330). Tey argue that in order to understand the SEI’s identity, it is
necessary to pay attention to the complex, dynamic relationships between all aspects of life, wherefore
narrative analysis is well suited. Tey fnd, that the SEI emphasises theoretical, philosophical and political
reasoning when explaining the own doings, while more fnancial, organisational and practical aspects are not
spoken about. Due to this fnding of thematic suppression (p. 342) Jones et. al (2007) argue that the SEI faces
difculties to integrate narratives of being entrepreneurs, with a focus on monetary and business aspects, and
those of being a social, ideological activist. In order to generate nuanced understandings of how this counts
for diferent SEIs, they call for similar research with less ideologically inclined SEIs.
Parkinson’s (2005) and Parkinson and Howorth’s (2008) work is based on phenomenological interviews with
fve UK based SEIs. Trough narrative analysis, they fnd that SEIs narrate themselves and their engagement
through and in relation to other people. Furthermore, and partly similar to Frogget and Chamberlayne, they
fnd that SEIs draw legitimacy primarily from perceived social needs, rather than from their entrepreneurial
activities. Also they call for similar research, with the intention to move forward the application of language-
11
based approaches within studies of SE and SEI. Moreover, they point out that their fndings might be
infuenced by cultural factors.
Also, Strauch’s work (2009, 2012) has a focus on SEIs’ constructions of themselves in his narrative analyses of
biographical interviews. As with Dey and Steyaert (2012), he emphasises exploration and openness as
important research principles. As with Frogget and Chamberlayne (2007), he fnds that SEIs narratives ofen
are driven by difculties, failure and brokenness. Tough diferent to them, he argues that such narratives are
more frequent than narratives that sketch an extraordinary individual or a miraculous development (2009,
2012). Similar to Jones et al. (2007) and Dey (2008), Strauch fnds that polarisations are used to construct the
SEI identity. Nevertheless some of his conclusions difer signifcantly from Jones et al. (2007). Tey argue that
contradicting identities are narratively suppressed in the attempt to construct the SEI identity. On the
contrary, Strauch suggests that the concept SEI serves as a function, whereby individuals integrate diverging
identities (2009, 2012). As with all the presented publications, Strauch also calls for more research with
narrative approaches, in order to generate further nuances on the preconceptions of SEIs.
With this thesis I intend to respond to this call for further investigations. Te request for narrative
approaches is therefore directly integrated into the main research question. Moreover and as I will explain in
the following chapters, the previous research inspired the way the interviewguide is shaped, the frst readings
of the empirical material and infuenced the formulation of the analytical emphases. Te review also helps me
to qualify what insights are missing and which settings are lacking attention, hence it infuenced the case
choice4. Finally, the previous studies serve as a base to discuss the fndings of my analysis 5.
Having clarifed how I defne and approach the SEI, the next chapter outlines the fundamental assumptions
about identity and narratives that the thesis rest upon.
4 Outlined in the forthcoming 3. Teoretical Assumptions and Emphases of the Tesis & 4. Methodology
5 Outlined in the forthcoming 6. Discussions and Conclusions
12
3. Teoretical Assumptions and Emphases of the Tesis
Tis chapter starts with an elaboration of the thesis’s fundamental assumptions on anti-essentialism, as
within social constructionism, and its implication for the comprehension of meaning and language. I
subsequently outline the hereto related discernment of identity, self and narratives. Ten I explain the use of
Mishler’s (1999) research on crafsartist narratives. Having said that, starting from Mishler’s specifcation of
Narratives of Praxis (1999), I frstly particularise the conception of the relation between identity and
narratives upon which the thesis investigation rests. Secondly, I elaborate on the four emphases and how they
serve to describe what I found in the empirical material.
3.1. Anti-Essentialism, Meaning and Language
In the middle of the 20th century – ofen named as postmodernism - beliefs about one universal “truth" started
to be questioned in human and social sciences (Hermansen, Løw & Petersen, 2004). Such alternative
assumptions are, among others, represented in social constructionism, which takes its ofspring in Berger and
Luckmann (1966, in Rasmussen, Østergaard & Beckmann, 2006). Tese scholars where some of the frst to
point out that what is considered as "truth" can vary within diferent social communities, cultures and
historical periods (ibid.).
Tis presumption embraces an anti-essentialist perspective. Contrary to an essentialist perspective, with
this perspective knowledge about the world and reality is not viewed as a direct account of what is "out there"
or "what a thing is". It is understood as a construction based on humans meaning makings (Bruner, 1991;
DeFina, 2006, Hermansen et al., 2004). Hence, instead of the "truth" it is only possible to speak about
multiple "truths" (Ibid.). However, with a social constructionist perspective, meaning is not viewed as
something which emerges in the individual alone, but as constructed, kept alive and modifed through an
ongoing social process.
Language, as a constituent of this process, is attributed with a special status. It is considered the means by
which people make sense of, construct and negotiate their realities and their truths, thus creating meanings
(Hermansen et al., 2004). Tis divergence from an essentialist perspective on language as something by which
one can gain access to reality, to something which constitutes notions of reality, has become known in
human and social science as the Linguistic turn. By this turn, texts, talks, narratives and discourses have
13
become central research objects (Nygaard, 2012, Czarniawska, 2004).
3.2. Identity and Self
Tis thesis’s focus is on the individual, wherefore I clarify the implication of an anti-essentialist perspective
on the way the individual and its identity are understood and studied.
Within an essentialist view the individual is seen as autonomous and its personality or identity is
considered stable and constant over time and across situations. Personality and identity are regarded as
identifable by context-independent traits and variables. With this perspective it is considered plausible to
study personality and identity as something observable and measurable, about which predications can be
made (Bruner, 1991; DeFina, 2006).
Contrary to that, an anti-essentialist perspective, as within social constructionism, implies that also
understandings of the individual and its identity are themselves social constructions (DeFina, 2006). Identity
is seen as created in ongoing, revisable and negotiated meanings about an individual. Tis makes identity
conceptions context dependent and not clearly locatable within one individual. With such a view, identity
becomes polyphonic and fragmented, which means that neither fxed nor predicting renditions - hence no
essentialist interpretations - can be made about it (Bruner, 1991; Hermansen et. al., 2004 DeFina, 2006;
Mishler, 1999).
Resting on such a view, Butler describes identity as something, which is not given, but is constantly
performed (1990, in DeFina, 2006). Tis understanding of identity as a process can also be read in Bruner
(1999, in Hermansen et al., 2004). He argues that individuals are coming to themselves through a constant
becoming process. Tis underlines that not only identity is considered social, but that individuals are also
active in construction of their identities. Based on such understandings, the term identity is also ofen
substituted by "self" (DeFina, 2006, Hermansen, et. al., 2004) and have been specifed and labelled diferently
as relational (Gergen, 1994, Mishler, 1999), socially distributed (Mishler, 1999), discursive (Davies & Harré,
1990), dialogical (Hermans, Kempen & Van Loon, 1992) and narrated (Sarbin, 1986; Bruner, 1987).
In consideration of this delineation, I use the term "individual" so as to specify the unit on which the focus
is laid. I avoid the term "personality”, as it insinuates an essentialist understanding of determinability and
predictability, whereas I use the two terms "identity" and "self" in reference to the continuously, relationally
constructed notions of the individuals. Whether one term or the other is preferred depends on the feld of
analysis e.g. philosophy, psychology and organisational studies, and on the focus of inquiry e.g. social,
cultural, gender, organisational, work, professional, occupational (DeFina, 2006). Nevertheless the thesis
14
focuses on the SEI - due to which the interest tends to concentrate on a working, occupational and
professional spheres - the thesis rest on a theoretical tradition where both terms are used. Tough, I follow
those theorists, who favour the term "identity" regarding individuals’ working and occupational related
constructions of themselves (Mishler, 1999). I only do so in order to ensure a conceptual coherence, as can be
seen in the formulation of the research question. In this I make use of "themselves" with the purpose to
underline my understanding of individuals’ constituting role in the construction of their identity 6 (ibid.;
Riessman, 2008, DeFina, 2006, Hermansen, et. al., 2004). In relation to the research question I fnally want to
point out that I set the SEI in inverted commas so that my anti-essentialist, social constructionist perspective
is highlighted; I do not comprehend the word SEI to be a refection of a particular individual which is
essentially given, but consider it as having a socially ascribed meaning (Brunner, 1999).
3.3. Narrative Identity Research
My assumptions about identity entail that the application of variable-centred theories and models are of little
value. While linguistic theories on identity and self make way to be sensible to how individuals construct
themselves. In this vein, it is also by the previous research on the SEI, as presented in the preceding chapter
argued that the language-in-use should be turned into focus when the aim is to bring forth understandings of
SEIs.
One feld which ofers such theories is narrative identity research. It is infuenced by the Narrative turn, a
branch of the linguistic turn, where the focus is on narratives and stories (Czarniawska, 2004; DeFina, 2006).
Te feld has existed for three decades, settled in and infuenced by many disciplines such as sociology,
anthropology and social psychology. Nevertheless the scope of the feld a consensus is that turning the focus
on narratives and stories does not give the possibility to make general claims or predictions. But narratives
and stories are considered fundamental units in the identity construction process ((Mishler 1999, 1986;
DeFina, 2006; Riessman, 2000, 2002, 2008; Czarniawska, 2004). Terefore, their investigation is an avenue, by
which to engender understandings of variations and complexities and of temporal, contextual and plurality
aspects in the ongoing process of meaning and identity construction (Ibid.).
Te feld’s enormous breadth and diversity of theories and assumptions refuses a canonical defnition of
narratives and of their relation to identity constructions. Terefore I pursue an explorative and empirically
driven approach. By proceeding like this I follow the suggestion made by many narrative researchers
6 Outlined in greater detail in the forthcoming 3.5. Narratives as Praxis
15
(Mishler 1999, 1986; DeFina, 2006; Riessman, 2008; Czarniawska, 2004) and of all the presented previous
studies on SEIs with a narrative approach. However, before I specify the assumptions and the concepts I
adjudged useful for the description of what I found in the interviews, I outline by which defnition of
narratives the readings of those are conducted.
3.4. Narratives
Defnitions of what constitutes a narrative can be categorised as being either narrow or widened (Riessman,
2008). Narrow means that narratives are only defned as such if they contain specifc features. Depending on
the particular defnition such elements are e.g. an actor, a setting, an action, a plot (Ibis.). By this narratives
are closed segments and stretches which can be found within a lot of other kinds of speak. In opposition,
widened defnitions are broad and inclusive, as what is meant by a narrative can be all kinds of speech (Ibid.).
In this thesis I apply such a non-restrictive defnition of narratives. I reckon this to enrich the analytical
work with the empirical material, as it also allows the inclusion of unfnished and fragmented elements in the
individuals’ talk which in turn, makes it possible to pay attention to the processual, ambivalent and pluralistic
aspects in the individuals’ meaning makings. Contrary, the use of a rather narrow defnition would have
meant an exclusion of huge parts of the material, which I judged valuable in order to gain impressions of the
SEIs’ diferent notions of themselves (Riessman, 2008). Tis means, that I defne the boundaries of a single
narrative only by its thematic demarcation, whereas I use the term "account" to refer to the individual’s entire
collection of narratives, thus the entire talk during the interview (Mishler, 1999; Riessman, 2008). Even
though some theorists argue that the term "story" should be preferred as the term "narrative" insinuates a
narrow defnition (Czarniawska, 2004), I decide to follow those who use both terms in reference to a widened
understanding (Mishler, 1999; Riessman, 2008).
3.5. Narratives as Praxis
Afer the frst readings of the interviews 7, I chose to use Mishler’s work on crafartists (1999) as an inspiration
for the purpose at hand. With his work, Mishler intends to increase the knowledge about crafartists individuals who are occupationally active in two felds of crafs and art. By applying anti-essentialist, social
7 Outlined in the forthcoming 4.4. Analytical Approach
16
constructionist assumptions about identity and a widened understanding of narratives, he investigates their
constructions of themselves. Tis investigation centres around four concerns; inter-individual variability in
personal and career trajectories, relational conceptions of identity, contradictions and tensions in life stories,
discontinuity in the achievement of adult work identities (1999; p. 7-17).
Te individuals and their working activities in Mishler’s study are diferent than in the thesis. However, I
consider them to share similarities, as also SEIs are active in a twofold manner, due to their social and/or
ecological and their entrepreneurship activities. Moreover, I valuate his study to be encompassing in regard
to the concerns of all the previous research on the SEI with a narrative approach 8.
However, this is not to say, that I use Mishler’s work as a template. I only select and apply some of his
concepts and theories as a lens and vocabulary, so as to help in the description of what I found in the
empirical material. Based on this I formulated the four emphases 9, by which I can relate the three SEIs’
narrations to each other and discuss the generated understandings in light of similar previous research.
Before turning to a detailed elaboration of the lenses and vocabulary, I outline Mishler’s defnition of
narrative as praxis. While I do not apply his work as a blueprint, I use his defnition of narratives as praxis in
order to make explicit my understanding of narratives and their relation to identity.
Narratives as praxis can be criticised, as it does not present a clear cut theory or defnition on narrative
identity, but rather a collection of assumptions inspired by diferent theories and ideas. As Mishler elucidates,
it is as summary of theoretical perspectives or as a place-holder on assumptions (Mishler, 1999; p. 18). Tough,
precisely this is the reason that I make use of it; Narratives as praxis builds on, resounds and expands on
theories and ideas of narrative analysis and narrative identity research, in particular from the feld of social
psychology (Mishler. 1999). Based on this, I evaluate it to be a well-founded, capacious condensation of
assumptions, which specifes the implications of my anti-essentialist, social constructionist perspective on the
role of narratives in the identity construction process.
Mishler defnes narratives as "praxis" in order to stress the "dialectic interplay between our dual positions
as subjects, frst as active agents making and transforming the world, which then becomes objective condition to
which we must then respond, as we adapt, make and transform both ourselves and these conditions (Mishler,
1999; p. 18). He specifes the meaning of narratives in this dialect praxis, and hereby in the identity
construction process, by particularising narratives in three ways: i) as socially situated actions, ii) as identity
performances and iii) as fusions of form and content. So to make clear the assumptions that underpin my
8 Outlined in the forthcoming 3.6. Four Emphases
9 Outlined in 1.1. Research Questions
17
investigation I expound these in the following.
3.5.1. Narratives as Socially Situated Actions
Narratives are particularised as socially situated actions, in order to emphasise their function and location
within an ongoing stream of social interactions. Mishler has developed this particularisation on some of his
previous studies, where he defned the occasion in which narratives are uttered, as speech events. Tis
assumption is inspired by ideas about speech activities as formulated by the sociolinguists Hymes (1967) and
Gumperz (1982, both in Mishler, 1991). Te fact that narratives are socially situated actions underlines that
narratives are purposeful and based on intentions, in regard to the specifc audience or listener/s in the
situation of their utterance (Mishler. 1999).
Te audience also has the important function of interpreting the likeliness or the meaningfulness of what
is said. Tis means, that storytelling is an action through which it is assessed, whether ones interpretations
make sense. Whether they ft with what is accepted in the particular social community. Tis also implies that
not every random narrative can be told. If a narrative is too exaggerated or deviates too much from the social
cannon, it will be rejected or at least modifed by the audience (Mishler, 1999). Tis underlines that narratives
come into being through the negotiation of understandings in interaction. Mishler names this the co-creation
of narratives and meaning (Mishler, 1999: p. 18). We constantly both re-establish and re-interpret the
meanings or understandings of ourselves and what we are doing through dialogue, and thereby also our
values and our culture. As Mishler expounds “we are not cultural dopes, but rule users, who do not simply
follow cultural plots in storying our lives, but adapt, resist and selectively appropriate them” (1999: p. 18).
3.5.2. Narratives as Identity Performances
Specifying narratives as identity performances builds on ideas by Kirsten Langellier, a speech and
communication scholar, ofen cited and used in investigations with a narrative approach (Riessman, 2008;
Czarniawska 2004; Rodes & Brown, 2005; DeFina 2006). She stresses that “the full meaning of narratives is
performative rather than semantic, located in the consequences of narratives as well as its meanings”
(Langellier, 1999, in Mishler, 1999. p. 19). Mishler argues that we perform ourselves through our narratives;
We express, display and make claims about who we are and what we are doing. By our narratives we engage
in the construction process of what is meaningful and what makes sense regarding ourselves. Trough telling
our narratives about ourselves and our activities, we engage in the construction of our identities.
Consequently, when the intention is to develop comprehensions of how individuals create their identities,
18
special attention has to be paid to the way in which they speak about themselves and their doings.
When narratives are socially situated actions and identity performances they must be considered uniquely
dependent on the situation of their utterance. Tis suggests the conceptualisation of identities as situated or
context dependent (Mishler, 1999). Tis is not to say that individuals’ notions of themselves lose their
relevance from one situation to another. Tough, the co-creation of meaning and narratives implies that
identities are under constant negotiation. Terefore “every narrative identity is multiple, fragmentary and
unfnished. Identity is a performative struggle and always destabilized” (Langelier, 1999, in Mishler, 1999. p.
19). Based on this, Mishler specifes that "identity is a multiplex, rather than a simplex, organized around a
plurality of nodes of relationships" and that these identities are to be seen as "dynamic and changing patterns",
"a structure in tension, always in process of change and reformation" (1999: p. 123).
Wanting to gain impressions of these multiple and situated identity constructions requires the conduction
of what Mishler calls a contextualization process. Tis process includes considerations as to why a particular
identity performance or meaning construction of the self might be enacted in a specifc situation and as how
identity narrations emerge by negotiations (Mishler, 1999).
3.5.3. Narratives as Fusions of Form and Content
Te particularisation of narratives as fusions of form and content specifes for narratives, as I have already
outlined concerning language10. Narratives are not a medium by which to get access to reality and identities,
but constitute them. Mishler builds this assumption on Hayden White, a historian, who investigated the
storytelling in history and in turn had a strong infuence on the narrative turn in social sciences (Carniawska,
2004). White argues that the forms, by which narratives are told, are not only stylistic features, which make
more vivid the historical facts, namely the content. Rather "narratives possess a content prior to any given
actualization of it in speech or writing" (Mishler, 1999; p. 20). Narratives are not only carriers of whatever
content they are supposed to mediate, but the particular narrative form infuences the content, which means,
the narrative form infuences the meaning. Te implication of this is that "an adequate understanding of
meaning, and this applies as well to narratives and other genres, depends on the analysis of it as a verbal
contraption, discovering all the language games that enter into its construction" (Mishler, 1999, p. 20). Tis
signifes that in order to apprehend how identities are spoken, the focus cannot only be on themes in
narratives. But an investigation should also take into consideration how narratives are set together.
10 Outlined in 3.1. Anti-Essentialism, Meaning and Language
19
3.6. Four Emphases
Afer having specifed my theoretical assumptions on identity, narratives and their relation to each other, I
now elaborate on the four emphases. In regard to each emphasis, I outline the lenses and vocabulary used to
describe what I found in the empirical material. Te space given to each emphasis in this chapter roughly
refects how much it serves as a tool for the descriptions in chapter 5’s analysis.
3.6.1. Identity Claims and Positionings
Trough the frst readings, I found that the SEIs interview accounts are traversed by elaborations by which
the SEIs specify themselves and their doings in relation to e.g. ideas, approaches and occupations, and in
relation to designated people and their activities. I consider it important to be attentive to such elaborations,
which I do by the means of the frst emphasis. In order to describe these elaborations of the SEIs I apply
Mishler’s vocabulary of identity claims (1999) and build on his use of Positioning Teory (Davies and Harré,
1990).
Based on the assumptions of narratives as socially situated actions and as identity performances, Mishler
reframes the individuals’ utterances as identity claims. He does so in relation to his frst concern of interindividual variability in personal and career trajectories, in order to document for the crafartists’ diferent
meaning makings on themselves. Reframing an individual’s utterances as identity claims enables him to
depict individuals’ diferent reasoning, resentments and assertions regarding themselves and their doings
(Mishler, 1999). Also I estimate identity claims to be a useful concept. It assists me to describe how the SEI
speak about themselves and how they do so diferently in comparison to each other.
Furthermore, Mishler (1999) explores how individuals construct themselves through relational dialectics.
Te theoretical underpinnings for this is Positioning Teory b y Davies and Harré (1990), which has had a
strong infuence on the feld of narrative identity research (Riessmann, 2002; Campbell & Hufngton, 2008).
Te theory describes how individuals narrate themselves in relation or disrelation to others and to more
abstract aspects as values, discourses, culture etc. Trough such elaborations, individuals establish what they
wish to be a part of and what not. Tey outline their considerations of who they are and what they are doing
(Davies & Harré, 1990). Based on this, I believe the concepts of positionings and counter positionings to be
useful, in order to describe how the SEIs narratively relate and disrelate themselves.
Tis choice is in line with previous research using the same approach to study SEIs. Dey (2008) uses this
theory for his empirical investigations of SEIs. Jones et al. (2007) use the complementary concepts selfidentifcation and self-disidentifcation (p. 332). Tey defne these in reference to Davies and Harré (1990)
20
and to McCall, who congruently theorises that individuals discursively construct themselves by elucidations
of Me and Not-Me (2003, in Jones et al., 2007).
Furthermore, I make use of Davies and Harré’s concepts (1990) as they defne positionings and counter
positionings as dialogic. Speakers’ taken positionings are either accepted, modifed or rejected by listeners,
while such acts are also moves due to which listeners simultaneously positions themselves and the others.
Tis means that positionings are dynamic, in constant fux and based on a consecutive process (Davies &
Harré 1990). Accordingly, positionings present a lens and vocabulary, which permit to reach an adequate
degree of sensitivity to the dialogical, co-creational and negotiated infuence on the SEIs’ constructions of
themselves.
3.6.2. Functions of Other People
As this is a recurring aspect in the SEI’s accounts, I consider it important to investigate how the SEIs speak
about other people in relation to themselves and their activities. I do so by my second emphasis. Previous
narrative research on the SEI highlighted the importance of other people in the SEI’s construction of
themselves as well. Tese studies argue, that SEIs speak about other people as having infuenced their
activities and initiatives, how they got involved in what they are doing and how they proceeded (Dey 2008,
2010; Dey & Steyaert, 2010a, 2010b, 2012; Frogget & Chamberlayne, 2007; Parkinsons, 2005; Parkinson &
Howorths, 2008; Strauch 2009, 2012). Similar, Mishler (1999) inspects, in the context of his second concern
of relational conceptions of identity, how individuals narrate themselves around the meanings of other people.
In order to evolve insights into these meanings, he pays attention to the way the individuals talk about other
people. For the purpose of a description of this, he applies the terms functions. Trough this he pictures how
the individuals attribute other people to have a stake in their own becoming process and their activities
(1999). For example, the elaboration of parents who had a function in one becoming a crafartist due to their
artistic lifestyle, or elaborations of how one does not care about the own health as a function of a partner’s
intensive focus on such matters (Mishler, 1999). Based on this, I also use functions as a concept as part of the
investigation of the second emphasis, so as to describe the meanings other people have for the SEIs notions
on themselves.
21
3.6.3. Difculties
Similar to the analogous research on SEIs, this thesis’ SEIs accounts are marked by manifold and diverse
difculties, complications and objections. Based on the terminology of previous research, I frame such
elaborations as difculties and tackle them by the third emphasis. To better describe these, I use some of the
wording Mishler (1999) deploys in relation to his concerns of contradictions and tensions in life stories and
discontinuity in the achievement of adult work identities.
Mishler relates the diverse identity claims and positioning he fnds throughout his investigation to
individuals’ diferent sub-identities. By the use of this concept he intends to echo alternative framings which
also emphasize the multiplicity of identities, as multiple selves (Josselson, 1996) and shifing social identities
(Lykes & Mallona, 1997, both in Mishler, 1999). However, these concepts indicate a greater stability
regarding the enactment of particular identities in relation to particular contexts, whereas Mishler’s concept
of sub-identities stresses that we always, in all contexts "speak or sing our selves as a chorus of voices (1999: p.
16) and that “we speak our narratives with diverse plots" (1999: p. 123).
Te inclusion of the concept sub-identity enables Mishler to explore how individuals’ narratives are
characterised by diverse desires. Tis is salient especially in the case of individuals, active in diverse felds. He
documents this by spelling out how the craf-artist perpetually juggles between diferent identity claims and
positions of being artists and crafspeople. Moreover, he shows that this is also infuenced by the individuals
many other sub-identities as e.g. being a mother or a father, a wife or husband, a friend, a citizen. But the
individuals not only juggle between diferent sub-identity constructions and their desires, but also due to
other more external factors, which furthermore cause competing requirements (Mishler, 1999).
In addition, Mishler investigates how the individuals narratively handle these diverse aspirations and
obligations. He shows, how the individual construct themselves as integrative, aligning, compromising,
balancing but also as separative in regard to their diverse sub-identities’ desires and in contemplation of
contradictory requirements (1999). Moreover, he fnds that this handling is an ongoing, agitating process,
due to which the individuals also outline contradictions, tensions and doubts (1999). Additionally, he
documents how these at times are not manageable by the individuals. He does so by pointing out that the
individuals’ stories are denoted by discontinuities and transitions (Mishler, 1999). Mishler labels these as detours. He also illustrates how the individuals construct these stories as being on line, as well as out of line, in
relation to their current narrative perspective (1999).
22
3.6.4. Happenstances
Resembling what was found by the commensurable research (Frogget & Chamberlayne, 2007; Parkinsons,
2005; Parkinson & Howorths, 2008; Strauch 2009, 2012), in the SEIs accounts, elaborations of fateful
incidences and happenings are noticeable. Elaborations which the SEIs conceive as having had a stake in
them becoming engaged in SE and in their current doings. Trough the last emphasis, I capture such
narratives under the term happenstances. For the description of these I utilize some of the lexis Mishler
applies in relation to his concern of discontinuity in the achievement of adult work identities (1999).
Mishler inspects and depicts how individuals speak about themselves and their doings as afected by luck,
chance, coincidence and the right circumstances (Mishler, 1999). Grounding in these investigations Mishler
argues that individuals’ narratives ofen are characterised by portrayals of suddenly fnding ones medium,
rather than of deliberated search. He labels such narratives as accidental self-discoveries (1999).
Having annotated the lenses and the vocabulary I use for the descriptions throughout the four emphases, I
now move to the methodology applied for the thesis’ intentions.
23
4. Methodology
Methodological choices always rest on believes about the world and knowledge (Nygaard, 2012a). So to make
these believes lucid for the reader, this chapter starts with a subordinate elaboration of the scientifc
theoretical position in social constructionism. I outline this position’s implication in greater details along the
single elements on which my methodology is based; I make clear why I chose a case study and in particular
the three SEIs. With that in mind, I describe the frst contact with the SEIs and present them. Ten I elaborate
the reasons why I used interviews as a method, which insights interviews generate and how I conducted
them. Aferwards, I describe the analytical approach, encompassing both the transcription and translation
process, and the three analytical perspectives that channelled the investigations of the interviews. Finally, I
discuss the dialogical process of this thesis and how the thesis can be evaluated.
4.1. Social Constructionism
A scientifc theoretical position can be defned by its ontology and epistemology. Te former refers to the
philosophical study of the nature of the world, whereas the latter has its focus on human knowledge
(Rasmussen et al., 2006). Diferent assumptions about ontology and epistemology condition diferent
scientifc paradigms (Kuhn, 1962, in Nygaard, 2012a).
Te Positivist paradigm, which has its origin in natural sciences, can be described as the frst and still the
strongest, also within social sciences. It is constituted by a realistic ontology where the world is considered as
given, hence it embraces an essentialist perspective. In terms of research this means that the object under
study exists independently of the research project and the researcher. In extension, positivism’s epistemology
is objectivism. It is considered possible to generate researcher independent universal knowledge, as long as
research is based on quantitative and replicable methods (Presskorn-Tygesen, 2012; Nygaard, 2012b).
In contrast, this thesis takes other ways regarding believes about the world, knowledge and how research
should be conducted. As outlined a social constructionism paradigm embraces the assumption, that the
world cannot be understood independently of humans’ social constructions 11. Research does not abstain
from this. Indeed, the research object under investigation cannot be approached independently from the
11 Outlined in 3.1. Anti-Essentialism, Meaning and Language
24
constructions made by the researcher. In other words, the generated knowledge about the research object will
always be dependent on the researchers meaning making and interpretations (Hermansen et al., 2004; Holm
Larsen, 2012). Tis signifes that objectivity should be considered impossible. Due to this, the paradigm’s
epistemology is determined by subjective. Tis implies that the ontology is in dependence of the
epistemology, wherefore this paradigms ontology is defned as rather relativistic (Wenneberg, 2002).
Conducting investigations within this paradigm has implications for all methodological consideration and
decisions, which is why these are explained thoroughly throughout the next sections.
4.2. Case Study
In the literature review I pointed out that more critical and empirical research on the SEI is needed 12.
Terefore I conduct an in-depth case study. Such way of proceeding is suitable when a phenomenon is
under-researched and/or should be approached critically, in regard to usually applied theories and methods
(Yin, 2002).
Tis thesis can be described as being based on a multiple-case study, through the inclusion of three
diferent SEIs. Tis feature leaves room for a certain degree of comparison between the cases investigated,
whereby similarities and diferences can be pointed out (Andersen, 2010).
Needless to say, a case study does not represent the entire population nor it possesses the statistical
properties of large samples used in positivist empirical research. Te latter is necessary when the goal is to
obtain results generalizable to a larger pool of subjects. Yet, if the purpose is to generate detailed and nuanced
discernments, in depth case studies are of critical value (Rasmussen et al., 2006). On behalf of this I believe
three SEIs to be sufcient. Having to investigate more individuals would have increased the degree of
superfciality and made it unfeasible to pay attention to the individuals’ unique constructions (Ibid.). For this
reason, also most of the previous research on the SEI with a narrative approach is based on a single or few
individuals. So to extend on this previous research, I select the three SEIs by considerations of what
'instances' have not gained much attention yet (Andersen, 2010). By choosing German based SEIs I
contribute to the literature on SEIs as the cultural context difers from the one already studied in Howorth
and Parksion (2008). Another way through which I intend to contribute to the literature is to look at less
ideologically inclined SEIs compared to the work already done by Jones et al. (2007). To determine whether
SEIs are less ideologically inclined is difcult to do beforehand. Te SEI on which Jones et al.’s investigation is
12 Outlined in 2.4. Research on Social Entrepreneurs with Narrative Approaches
25
based, is engaged in an initiative which is close to the NPO-end of the presented continuum 13. Contemplating
this I could have chosen SEIs engaged in initiatives with a legal form which are closer to the other end of the
continuum. However, this would have demanded the application of a SE-defnition, at least in regard of the
legal form. One way to overcome this obstacle is to look for SEIs engaged in initiatives which are ofering
products and/or services that must compete in the free market, independently of the initiatives legal form. In
doing so, I reckoned to fnd less ideological and more business inclined SEIs. Finally, I selected individuals
who actually started the SE- initiatives not other individuals involved, supposing that the chosen are the ones
spoken about as SEIs.
4.2.1. Contact to the "Social Entrepreneurs"
I selected the SEIs for this thesis among the scholarship holders of the SE support organisation "SEsup". Te
scholarship is given to individuals with an already established SE-initiative. SEsup is support by a German
government department and itself and some of the scholarship holders have been awarded both on national
and international level. Terefore it can be assumed that the three chosen individuals are acknowledged as
SEIs and that those, at least to a certain degree, considered themselves as such (Parkinson & Howorths, 2008)
I identifed the three SEIs via the SEsup’s website, where all scholarship holders are presented. I contacted
them by email, wherein I delineated the interest and the conditions of the interview 14. I also clarifed in
advance that the fnal focus of this thesis would be derived by the interview, so to avoid that they would be
allured by envisaged benefts (Rasmussen et al.,2006). As an ethical standard in social sciences, I specifed that
all information is treated confdential by keeping them anonymous. I also supposed that this would increase
the SEIs’ willingness to participate (Ibid.; Andersen, 2010) and their degree of comfort during the interview
(Kvale, 2008).
4.2.2. Presentation of the "Social Entrepreneurs"
Because of the confdentially warrant I assign to each SEI and a fctitious name which I use in the remaining.
Ida and Ability
Afer having fnished high school, Ida volunteered in diferent organisations and projects, working with
people with disabilities. During the fnal project for her diploma in product design, Ida developed a design
13 Outlined in 2.2. Diverse Defnitions and Foci in Social Entrepreneurship Research - See Appendix I. Defnitions of Te Social Entrepreneur and
Social Entrepreneurship - Figure 1.: Spectrum of SE initiatives
14 See Appendix III. Letter of Request
26
approach for the work with people with disabilities, employed in sheltered workshops. In this, people with
disabilities get the chance to learn about their own strengths and abilities by creating design objects which are
sold via diferent shops and retailers. Afer having fnished university,Ida founded Ability in 2011. Since then,
the design approach had been translated into a numerous projects and collaborations. It is used in sheltered
workshops, with prisoners, within intercultural projects, and with people with disabilities and company
managers together.
Ability’s daily operations are done byIda and three other people, of which two are part-time volunteering
students. Additionally four other designers are involved sporadically.
Lis and Doll
Lis started Doll in 2009, afer having fnished her education as a product designer and having travelled to
India. Tere she was asked by a local production site to help in the design of a new collection. Here she got to
know about the local peoples’ dream to build a school. Together they asked school children to draw images of
their preferred dolls, which were used as an inspiration for the design of textile dolls, which are currently
produced in the Indian production site. Te Doll-project guarantees stable and safe working conditioning for
female textile workers. Te generated proft is given to a foundation, founded together by Lis and the
workers, with the purpose to build and manage the school desired by the local community.
Doll’s daily operations are mainly executed by people in India, while Lis takes care of the sales and
marketing on the European and American market.
Alex and V-Fence
Alex, who started V-Fence in 2011, has a background in graphic design and is a practising fencer and vegan,
as he does not use or consume animal products. When he looked for fencing apparel not made from leather,
he came across only low quality ones. Terefore he himself developed apparel with a producer in Pakistan
and set up an online store where those are sold. Trough V-Fence sweatshop free standards had been
achieved at the production site in Pakistan, with the aim to achieve soon also fair trade standards. Moreover,
one Euro every sold apparel is donated to an environmental organisation.
Alex still works as a free-lance graphic designer and takes care of V-Fence’ daily operations and his
colleague Eva is responsible for administrative tasks. Besides, friends who are photographers, lawyers,
musicians and fencers are occasionally engaged.
27
4.3. Qualitative Interviews as Method
Quantitative methods with their focus on measurement and predictability are of minor value for the thesis’
aim. Contrary, qualitative methods ofer a way to generate detail rich and context-sensitive insights
(Rasmussen et al., 2006). Qualitative methods are however manifold, wherefore I specify, why interviews are
chosen.
As the word "interview" says, this method ofers an occasion in which a person’s view on a particular topic
can be unfolded. Hence, it is a well-suited method, for the thesis purpose to bring about insights on how SEIs
view themselves. However, the word "inter" also underlines that it is an interchange on views between two
people (Kvale, 2008). With a social constructionism position, this means, that an interview is not understood
as an occasion in which meanings or narratives can be collected. It is not a window to individuals’ social
realities and identities. It is a part of that reality (Czarniawska, 2004), a social situation itself in which
meaning and identities are enacted and co-created between two people (Mishler, 1999).
Tis entails that this method does not serve the attainment of predictions, even if just limited to the
specifc individual in diferent situations. While the audience and the situation is every time unique, the
interview represents one of multiple occasions in which impressions can be obtained on how individuals
engage in the meaning making (Czarniawska, 2004). As an individual’s meaning makings are considered to
be related to previous ones 15 and in particular with the increased interest in SE, it can be assumed that the
SEIs of this thesis already had many occasions to explain themselves and their doings. Tis means that some
of their narrative can be considered well-rehearsed and to have infuenced the accentuations of themselves in
the interview (Czarniawska, 2004). Hence, the interview is an occasion by which to acquire comprehensions
on how individuals engage in their identity construction process (Riessman, 2000, 2002, 2008).
I did not conduct repeated interviews with each SEI, even though this would have ofered another avenue to a
greater impression variety on the SEIs construction processes (Mishler, 1999). I also discarded the option to
conduct group interviews with other members of the initiatives, although this could have engendered insights
on how the SEIs accentuate themselves in relation to a more familiar audience (Ibis). I estimated these two to
be non-viable options as it was already difcult to fnd time with one individual for one interview. Besides, I
considered the option to investigate how the SEIs construct themselves in more daily settings, based on
observational methods (Czarniawska, 2004). Yet by discussing and refecting on possible methodological
15 Outlined in 3.5.2. Narratives as Identity Performances
28
avenues with a befriended SEI 16, I reached the conclusion that this method would be unfeasible, due to the
potential disturbance by me following the SEIs in their workdays. Finally I sorted out the study of documents.
For the purpose at hand I could have investigated only pre-existing texts produced for the public. However,
such kind of material is limited and, considering the reasoning of previous research, it could have led to a
repetition of the un-nuanced and purely positive "media"-stories about SEIs (Dey & Steyaert, 2012).
4.3.1. Narrative Interview Approach
Qualitative interviews can be done in various manners (Kvale, 2008). For this thesis’ purpose I conducted
them inspired by a narrative interview approach (Ibid.; Mishler, 1986, 1991; Hiles & Cermak, 2007). Te
approach is consistent with the thesis’ theoretical assumptions and the interest in narratives. It is based on
the conjecture that humans tend to reply with story-like accounts regardless of the nature of the question
asked to them (Ibid.). In this form, the interviewer therefore asks directly for stories or does elicit storytelling.
Te form captures valuable features of others with similar intentions, e.g. phenomenological or life world and
biographic interviews, as it gives individuals the space to elaborate their own perceptions and to develop
narratives with a starting point in the own life-course. While the strength of the narrative interview approach
is that it does not dictate which kind of narratives have to be told (Ibid.).
4.3.2. Interview Guide and Pilot
Qualitative interviews can be conducted open, semi-structured or fully structured (Kvale, 2008). Open means
that no themes and no questions are predefned. Such are mainly conducted, when nothing is known
beforehand or no focus is defned (Kvale, 2008; Mishler, 1991). Contrary does fully structured mean that it is
predetermined what is asked. Such is rarely used in narrative interviews, as it limits the fexibility to adapt to
the particular interview situation and hence, restricts that individual’s own perspectives and topics of
importance can emerge (Ibid.). Due to the pre-formulated interest in Ida, Lis and Alex’s narrations on
themselves as SEIs, I chose a semi-structured approach, which means I predefned an overall focus, but
modifed what and how I asked in pertinence to the unique course of the interview (Ibid.).
To get a better sense on what is of relevance for the interviews, but also avoiding that I would be too disposed
by the previous studies on SEIs, I aspired a frst empirical sensing. I held a conversation with an
16 Outlined in the forthcoming section 4.3.2. Interview Guide and Pilot
29
acquaintance, who herself is a SEsup Scholarship holder. Due to the familiarity to each other the narrations,
but also my interpretations on them, could be very implicit. Because of the peril that this confnes the reader’s
understanding, I do not include this conversation in the analysis (Riessman, 2008). However it helped me to
develop relevant themes for the interviews with Ida, Lis and Alex. Terefore I took notes on it immediately
aferwards, an established practice within qualitative methods (Andersen, 2010), which are accessible in the
appendix17
I developed an interview-guide based on the insights gained by this conversation, the previous studies on
SEIs and by literature on narrative interviews, theories and analysis (Kvale, 2008; Andersen, 2010).
Nevertheless the openness of the guide, it has an impact of the course of the interview, wherefore also the
guide is accessible in the appendix (Kvale, 2008; Mishler, 1991) and which is why I describe on which
considerations I developed the guide.
Te guide is composed of general themes, subsequent topics and possible questions. Te themes are:
1) Your story and the story of the initiative
6) Financial situation
2) Te meaning of the initiative for you
7) Your understanding of yourself
3) You and the work you do
8) External perception
4) Everyday work
9) Further aspects of importance
5) Meaning of institutions and organisations
An interview is a staged setting between unequal. Te interviewer is the power-holder, as the one who defnes
the focus, the themes and so, what is valuable (Mishler, 1986, 1999; Czarniawska, 2004; Kvale, 2008). In order
to counteract this asymmetry, but also with the intention to elicit Ida, Lis and Alex’s storytelling, I preluded
the interview by highlighting that they are the experts and that the centre of the conversation should be their
stories, what they consider important and what being an SEI means for them. I encouraged them to talk
freely and to start wherever they wanted. Possible questions, as "How did you come to the point where you are
today?", "What experience or events had been important?" served as a help in the case that one of them did not
know where to start.
Also I saw the interest in the SEIs’ notions of themselves, approachable by the second theme, illuminated
through topics of "Te meaning of the initiative for your life in general" and "Te meaning of the initiative for
17 See Appendix II. Notes on Pilot-Conversation
30
your current daily life". With the same intention, though with a stronger anchorage in their actual doings, I
developed the third theme with sub-sequent topics as: "When is the work good", "What marks you in your
work". For the same purpose I developed the fourth theme with topic as "Preferred tasks".
I also anticipated that the third and fourth theme would open up a path to tell about complications,
objections and changes. For this aim, I formulated sub-sequent topics a s "Are there things about i) you ii)
tasks in the initiative that make the work difcult" and "Changes and doubts" under the third theme and the
topic "Less preferred tasks" under the fourth theme. Furthermore I also saw the sixth theme as an avenue by
which the individuals could speak about complications.
I built the ground for them to tell about other peoples, institutions and organisations’ infuence on
themselves and their doing already by the frst, but in particular by the ffh theme. So to get an even more
nuanced sense of their understanding of themselves I formulated the seventh theme, whit topics as
"Understanding of you as a designer/a SEI/ an activist/a change maker".
In order to develop insights on how they considered themselves perceived by others I developed the eights
theme. By including the topic "Others’ wrong images, assumptions and beliefs" I also conceived the eights
theme as another option to speak about difculties.
Finally, so to ensure that Ida, Lis and Alex’s own perceptions and importance are included, I rounded all
interviews with the last theme, asking for "Important aspects that were not covered throughout the interview"
Te main role of the interviewer in a narrative interview is to be a facilitator of the individuals’ story
telling. In other words, my role was to listen without interrupting and to ask questions for further
descriptions, clarifcations and specifcations only (Riessmann, 1993, 2008; Mishler, 1991, 1999; Kvale, 2008;
Czarniawska, 2004, Hiles & Cermak, 2007). Te last aspect necessitates a sensitivity to what is said and
notably, what is not said and a mindfulness on the own presuppositions (Kvale, 2008). On that note, I asked
questions of "where", "when", "who", "what" and "why" regarding everything told (Hiles & Cermak, 2007). I
repeated the interviewees’ sentences and words reframed as questions (Riessmann, 1993) and summoned
them to explain their expressions and phrases in order to understand what they mean with these (Ibid.).
Further, I kept later in-depth questions in accordance to their own thematic ordering, so not to impose my
structure on their course (Hiles & Cermak, 2007). Tus, I did not use the guide as a base, from which I
introduce many of the themes myself, but rather as a checklist ensuring that the themes were covered and as
a tool to help eliciting the SEIs storytelling.
31
4.3.3. Interview Conduction
Preliminary I explained that the interview would not last longer than two hours, so that the SEIs knew what
to expect and did not get a discontented feeling through the interview. I also told that I would keep track of
the time, so they could speak freely without worrying about it (Hiles & Cermak, 2007). Te interviews lasted
between 85 and 105 minutes. It was possible to unfold all themes and none of the interviews had to be
fnished in a precipitous manner.
Also the setting and conversations beforehand can have an infuence on what is said throughout the
interview. So to give the reader access to my impressions on these, the recorded interviews are supplemented
by notes concerning this matter 18, taken immediately afer the conduction (Riessman 2008; Mishler, 2009;
Rasmussen et al., 2006).
4.4. Analytical Approach
Afer the foregoing description of how I generated the empirical material, I now explain the analytical
approach applied for its investigation.
4.4.1. Transcription and Translation
Te transcription of interviews is not a technical, neutral process, but is subject to considerations of relevance
and hence on interpretations. It makes a diference whether the speech is cleaned up or lef untouched with
the intention to capture all spoken details. As such choice infuences in turn the readers’ comprehensions,
they should be made explicit (Riessman, 2008; Mishler, 1999).
I carried out a detailed transcription having in mind that the many aspects of the individuals’ speech
could help me to generate more thorough discernments (Ibid.). In order to give the reader the chance to
evaluate my interpretations the full transcriptions and the transcription key are available 19. However, as the
level of details could disturb the reader’s immediate apperception, it is excluded in the quotations in the next
chapter (Mishler, 1986). Nevertheless in the quotes, no full stops are used with the endeavour to
approximate the way the SEIs speak (Czarniawska, 2004).
Te interviews were in German, the mother-tongue of all the participants, so to avoid translational
considerations to disturb the intuitive expression. Te same counts for the analysis. I frst did a translation on
18 See Appendix VI. Notes on the Interviews
19 See Appendix VII. Transcription Key and Appendix VIII. Transcribed Interviews
32
the chosen quotations, whereby I aimed for a refection of the enunciations in German, rather than to perfect
English (Czarniawska, 2004).
4.4.2. Tree Narrative Analytical Perspectives
Te analysis of narratives can be done in varied manner (Mishler, 1999). I chose narrative analysis, as I
judged it to be viable so to grasp the SEIs’ narrative constructions.
Narrative analysis has its origins in the analytical readings of religious documents, which infuenced
literary theory and social sciences (Polkinghorne, 1995, in Czarniawska, 1998). Tis deployment in diverse
felds has lead to a huge variety in how narrative analyses are executed (Mitchell & Egudo, 2003; Rhodes &
Brown, 2005). Hence, it does not present a clear cut analytical guide, but demands taking decisions in regard
to the particular investigative concern (Mishler 1999, Czarniawska, 2004, Riessman, 2008).
Due to the exploratory, empirical driven interest, I conducted the readings of the interviews without
looking for predefned questions or categories. Instead, I was channelled by the three analytical perspectives
Tematic, Structural and Dialogical/Performative as defned by Riessman (2008). I use these, as they are
encompassing and share similarities to others (Bamberg, 2012). For instance Czarniawska (2004) suggests
three similar readings, based on Hernadi’s hermeneutic triad (1987). However, her focus is on organisational
narratives (Czarniawska, 2004). Contrary, Riessman’s stance is more psychological and concentrates on
personal narratives and their unique compositions. (2001, 2002) Based on this similar concern I reckon her
perspectives more benefcial for my investigations.
Temactic Analysis
Tis analysis has a focus on "what" via the themes covered in the account. Tis represents a well-known
approach in qualitative studies, while distinctions can be seen in the coding procedure (Riessman, 2008). In
other thematic approaches, themes are typically derived through condensation and gathered into thematic
clusters, based on various cases. Te single account becomes fractured and the themes separated from the
context of emergence (Riessman, 2008). Diferently, thematic narrative analysis, as suggested by Riessman
(2008) and Mishler (1999) is individual centred, which means that themes are kept in relation to the specifc
account. I follow this suggestion, as it makes it possible to pay attention to the thematic inter-relatedness of
the individuals’ unique course. Moreover, it ofers a way to pay attention to the dialogical infuence on the
emerged themes (Ibid.).
33
Structural Analysis
Tis perspective inquires "how" narratives are set together. Tat can be done through an investigation of the
elements by which narratives are structured; as the scene or setting, the actor or actant, the actions, the plot.
Tis interrogation can generate interpretations of the function which such narratives serve the individual
(Riessman, 2008). Another way in which structural analysis are done, is by examining how individuals create
unifed and meaningful stories throughout their accounts (Ibid.). Te frst approach is based on rather
restricted defnitions of narratives20, while the second is incongruent with the theoretical assumption about
narratives and identities as being multiple, contradictory and fragmented (Riessman, 2008, Mishler, 2009).
Nevertheless I draw inspirations from this perspective so to get a greater sense of how the SEIs set their
narratives together.
Dialogical/Performative Analysis
Tis perspective has its provenance in similar ideas as those on which this thesis rests; the theoretical
tradition that stresses the importance of interactions and of reality as socially constructed (Riessman, 2008).
Te interview is considered a stage or an occasion, in which individuals are charting desirable impressions
and conceptions about them and the world, which are tested and negotiated with the counterpart/s (Ibid).
Te analytical focus can be described as both "what" and "how", in search of "why" something is said in that
particular manner, in that specifc situation (Ibid.).
4.4.3. Vertical and Horizontal Investigation
Guided by these perspectives, I at frst investigated the interviews vertically in their singularity (Tisted,
2003). I examined the themes in the accounts in order to understand around which the SEIs craf their
narratives and with what importance (Riessman, 2008). For this purpose I was also vigilant to lingual
features, so to get a sense of how thematic aspects are stressed or silenced. I inspected how one theme leads to
another, to gain acumen of how seemingly contradicting statements are resolved, relativized or explained
immediately or through later declarations (Mishler, 2009). I looked at lingual features and grammar aspects
to examine which performances created which kind of impression (Riessman, 2008). I searched for passages
that ft restrictive defnitions of narratives and attempted to comprehend what are the plots underlying them
and the intentions the interviewee seemed to have by creating those (Ibis.). Additionally, I investigated the
dialogical interactions and mutual meaning creations (Ibis.).
20 Outlined in 3.4. Narratives
34
As a next step, I investigated the three accounts horizontally by comparing them (Tisted, 2003). Due to
this I found cross-cutting themes and tendencies which I capture by the four emphases 21. Te comparison
made it possible to see the diferences among the SEIs as well. Moreover, combined with my previous
knowledge about SE and the SEI, it enabled a sense for what the individuals did not speak about. Hence, I did
the comparison also with the aim to bring about a greater comprehension of the SEI’s unique accentuations
(Mishler 1999, Riessman, 2008).
Te analytical approach rests strongly on the thematic analysis. However, the other two perspectives added
insights and ensured to come around the narratives in diferent manners, mitigating the risk of reading them
only for their mere content (Riessman, 2008). Moreover, the inclusion of all three warrants a compliance
with the assumption of narratives as praxis (Mishler, 1999)22.
Each analytical perspective contributes with discernments for all four emphases, wherefore the presentation
of what I found, is structured along the emphases and each SEI is threaded separately under these. Tough,
before proceeding to the presentation of the analysis, I use the remaining of this chapter for a refection on
the thesis’ overall approach and on how the thesis can be evaluated.
4.5. Refection on the Tesis’s Approach and Evaluation
Due to the empirical interest on how SEIs construct themselves this thesis’ approach has to be as open as
possible. Terefore, I choose not to become limited, neither by the use of well-established theories from the
feld of BE, nor through other prior chosen theories and concepts. Without such a frame, an exploratory
avenue becomes necessary (Rasmussen, Østergaard & Beckmann, 2006). While I strive for openness, it is
important to underline that the thesis approach is not free of prior assumptions, hence is not inductive (Ibid).
Te thesis rests on the science theoretical assumptions and the work presented through the review. Tese
guided the selection of the cases and the methodological choices, in particular, how the interviews were
conducted. Furthermore those infuenced the readings of the transcribed interviews (Riessman, 2008;
Czarniawska, 2004; Mishler, 1986, 1999). Tough, narrative analysis it is not a fxed template, with which the
account is investigated23. Te empirical material is given the main focus, as the frst explorative readings were
21 Outlined in 3.6. Four Emphases
22 Outlined in 3.5. Narratives as Praxis
23 Outlined in 4.4.2. Tree Narrative Analytical Perspectives
35
done without the lens of a specifc theory. First hereupon, I chose to make use of some of Mishler’s
vocabulary so to describe what I found in the accounts (1999). Tis means, that the thesis’ approach is not
deductive neither as no predefned theories and concepts are applied (Rasmussen et al., 2006).
Rather the presented approach of moving back and forth can be described as iterative (Rasmussen et
al.,2006) dialogical process (Humle, 2013). Due to this I do not only pursue a diferent approach than those
building on positivist assumptions, but also from others applying qualitative methods, while being based on
purely inductive approaches, i.e. Grounded Teory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). In such, it is considered desirable
and possible to reject all previous presumptions, so to develop assumptions and theories solely from what is
found empirically. Such an approach could have been suitable in regard of the thesis aim as well. However I
did not pursue such, due to the social constructionism premise, that "the truth" is not achievable. By this, all
fndings represent subjective and only one of many possible interpretations, regardless if they are derived by
grounded theory or by a dialogical process (Wenneberg, 2002).
However, I do not mean this to be a claim of absolute relativism, which is why I continue with refections
on how the thesis’ achieved knowledge on SEIs can be evaluated (Wenneberg, 2002). On behalf of this
concern, classical evaluation criteria are of little help. Reliability - whether the fndings are consistent and
stable over time and a range of respondents - and validity - whether what is intended to measure, actually is
measured – are incongruently with this thesis position. Tey are based on positivistic, realistic assumptions
about the possibility to achieve "the truth" (Rasmussen et al., 2006). For an investigation settled within the
realm of social constructionism, evaluations should focus on how new and usable insights it engenders. If it
contributes with a new perspective, facilitates new truths and meaning makings, hence expands the space of
possibilities for new constructions (Riessman, 1993; Czarniawska, 2004, Mishler, 2009). As explained
throughout the preceding chapters, these are the objectives the thesis is driven by. Tough, whether the
interpretations made have this potential will be dependent on the studies trustworthiness, an alternative
criterion ofen used in qualitative studies (Rasmussen et al., 2006, Riessman, 1993; Czarniawska, 2004,
Mishler, 2009). I attempt to enhance the trustworthiness of the thesis through persuasiveness (Riessman,
1993; Czarniawska, 2004; Harraway, 1988). For research counts, as does for individual’s identity claims: not
every interpretation made will be accepted. Interpretations far from what is acknowledged, will perhaps be
rejected, both in the practical and the academic feld. Terefore the thesis builds on theoretical assumptions
accepted and established in the feld of narrative identity research, so to have my interpretations considered
plausible and legitimate (Ibid.). Trustworthiness is increased by the documentation of refexivity as well
(Riessman, 1993). I endeavour this, through the implications’ assessment of the chosen approach and
through the considerations on how the thesis interest could have been approached diferently both
36
methodologically and theoretically wise24. Last but not least, trustworthiness depends on transparency
regarding the entire research process. Tis is why I described my methodological decisions in such detail and
why the entire empirical material is accessible (Mishler, 1999). Tis efort on refexivity and transparency has
simultaneously located me; another facet of trustworthiness in which it is evaluated if it is documented that
the fndings present a subjective and only one of multiple interpretations (Riessman, 1993). In consideration
of this I include the SEIs accounts through many and partly longer citations in the forthcoming chapter. Tis
allows the reader to judge my interpretations and perhaps to develop alternative ones (Ibid., Czarniawska,
2004).
Having outlined in which light I think this thesis approach and the hereby generated knowledge should be
evaluated, I advance to the analysis.
24 Further outlined in the forthcoming 7. Implications, Limitations and Future Research
37
5. Analysis
In this chapter I present the fndings of the analysis. In order to lay words on what I found in Ida, Lis and
Alex’s interview accounts, I use the lenses and vocabulary introduced in chapter 3 in relation to the four
emphases under investigation.
Te chapter at hand is divided into four sections, each related to one of the emphases. Firstly, I portray
how Ida, Lis and Alex create identity claims and positionings in regard to recurring themes. Ten I present
which functions the three relate to other people. Following this, I depict which difculties they construct
throughout their accounts and conclude with a delineation of which happenstances they speak about. Te
presentation of the fndings is then summarised and discussed in the next chapter.
5.1. Identity Claims and Positionings
In this section I reframe Ida, Lis and Alex’s narratives as identity claims (Mishler, 1999) in order to describe
how the SEIs work on their meaning makings of themselves. Furthermore, I illustrate what they consider to
be a part of and what not. I do so by picturing how they craf positonings and counter positionings (Davis &
Harré, 1990)25.
I describe the SEIs’ identity claims and positionings in regard of cross-cutting themes which I
encountered in the analysis of all three accounts. While these themes are strongly intertwined in the
individuals’ narrations, I attempt to sort them into fve categories. Derived through Ida, Lis and Alex’s own
wording, I headline these categories (Mishler, 1999) as: i) creativity and design; ii) social entrepreneurship
and non-governmental organisations; iii) entrepreneurship, business and proft; iv) caring about others and
empowerment; v) sustainability, ecology and animal protection.
5.1.1. Creativity and Design
In this section I present how Ida, Lis and Alex construct themselves and their doings through recurring
claims and positionings as being aestheticians, poetics, creative and designers.
25 Outlined in 3.6.1. Identity Claims and Positionings
38
Ida
Ida makes the identity claim as somebody who is interested in being and working creatively. By this she
narrates herself as in counter position with respect to people who study fne arts, whom she portrays as being
moved by more egoistic motives:
"I have quite deliberately decided to do a design course and not a fne art course, I had the
feeling, that one can change more with design, at least with what I am able to do, I simply had
a strong interest in just working creatively, to be creative, but found it too selfsh just to be
creative for myself"26
As in the preceding quote, Ida repetitively makes identity claims by which she models herself as a designer
and as somebody who works creatively. Simultaneously, she accentuates herself and her activities as not
being "conventional"27 and less selfsh than others in relation to design. Another of such elaborations can be
seen in this quote:
"in the creative feld one can either say one does such an ego-based style thing or, Ability is also
such a favela design story, with fxed points, so with certain fences and borders, but one simply
lets it grow and acts and reacts upon creative ideas of others"28
Also in this recital she defnes her style as less selfsh by a counter position towards more egoistic ones in the
creative feld. Another instance, where she crafs herself and her approach through such, is a narrative about
an internship:
"I thought, what I am doing here is not right, I do not need that, I need to fnd a diferent
vantage point and I eventually decided that for me design is not, this is something I had
previously, originally also decided, but then once again, very, very consciously I made the
decision that for me it is not about producing or designing any luxury-products for a luxury
market, which actually only produce waste and satisfy some strange capitalistic class with a
consumption experience, but that I absolutely want to use design as a leverage to make a social
26 Appendix VIII.I., L.: 80-85
27 Appendix VIII.I., L.: 228-229
28 Appendix VIII.I., L.: 603-606
39
diference"29
In this narration Ida counter positions towards certain aspects of design, which she criticises from an
environmental consciousness and capitalism sceptical stance.
Lis
Lis repetitively makes identity claims of being artistic, poetic and a designer. One example of such can be
seen in her explanation about a gender-related decision she took for Doll. In order to explain this decision
she refers to her other activities:
"my other objects, which somehow have nothing to do with children, which might be more
artistic"30
Furthermore, in relation to this gender-topic, she claims herself "to treat it a bit poetically"31 and emphasises
this by describing herself in counter positioning to somebody, who is treating this topic in a demonstrative
manner32.
L i s understands herself as a professional designer. An instance where this can be seen is her detailed
elaborations of her knowledge about design 33. Another example is her thorough description of a design fare
in which she partook in order to sell her products. In this she underlines the professionalism of the fare, 34 as
she crafs it in a counter position towards fea markets:
"so not a fea-market-sales fare (..) for mothers, but a fare for a professional audience only" 35
Te rendition, that being a designer and being artistic are of signifcance for Lis’ notion of herself, is further
seen in the manner she appraises and creates legitimacy for her doings. Troughout her entire account she
rather uses evaluative criteria which have an aesthetic association; as e.g. "I found it much more beautiful to
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 118-125
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 241-243
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 264-265
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 263-264
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 838-855
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 22-23
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 21-22
40
say"36 "then it was a well-rounded thing for me"37. Tis becomes particularly evident through her minor use of
other possible words such as. "good" "great" or "valuable".
Similar to Ida, also Lis simultaneously diferentiates herself in relation to normal product designers. An
example of this can be seen in the following quote:
"indeed I did not do the drawings myself, which someone in normal product design would do,
but I simply curated them, I chose them"38
By this counter position she sets her own way of doing apart from what is usually done in product design.
Alex
Alex also repetitively makes identity claims of being creative and a designer, as can be seen in this quote:
"I always wanted to have my own brand, on the side, to let of steam creatively, this is simply of
importance to me"39
Similar to this delineation of himself, he elaborates that design-tasks are the ones he enjoys the most and
where he spends a lot of time40.
As Lis, also Alex narrates himself to be a professional:
"I had experiences with brand-creation, because I just do branding, and I have always had tshirt-labels, so my thesis was a t-shirt-label, I just knew, how to make products and brands"41
In this depiction he claims himself to be experienced and skilled in brand creation, crafed through a
reference to his educational background.
36
37
38
39
40
41
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 166, 124, 168, 193, 431, 470, 699, 760
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 175 - 176 , 758, 806
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 181-182
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 344-345
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 524-533
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 18-22
41
5.1.2. Social Entrepreneurship and Non-Governmental Organisations
In this section I outline how Ida, Lis and Alex construct themselves by recurring claims and positionings in
relation or disrelation to SE, other SEIs, SE-initiatives and -enterprises and to NGOs.
Ida
Ida does not make identity claims of being an SEI, nor does she claim Ability to be an SE-initiative. Tough,
she portrays herself and her doings by an elaboration of her work with a NGO and a social enterprise. In so
doing she crafs two almost opposing actors, the NGO as rather negative:
"the NGO was a bit difcult, it simply could not provide a good base at all, because it had zero
resources, and everyone there was somehow struggling and it was surrounded by a very
negative energy and also they had very abstruse ideas about what I was supposed to do"42
Contrary to this, she pictures the social enterprise as positive by explaining:
"I ran directly into open doors and could just relatively freely develop with them" 43
Te fact that she positions herself in kinship to the positive impression of this social enterprise can be seen by
the plot she presents upon her narration:
"this was a very inspiring experience and even though I was not at all interested in business, it
showed me that it is possible to think about business diferently, that it is possible to do it in a
very diferent way and with a very diferent focus"44
Lis
Also Lis does not claim herself to be an SEI, but she describes her understanding of SE as cited:
"so this idea, this social entrepreneurship or this idea with an impact, that one does not just do
it on the side, but does it fully, which also includes that one can live by it" 45
42
43
44
45
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 92-96
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 102-104
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 104-107
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 700-703
42
A s she calls it an "idea" and only speaks about "one" not about herself, underlines that Lis does not
unambiguously relate herself to this conceptualisation of SE. Tis can also be seen in the following
elaboration of her activities:
"I mean, social entrepreneurship does not necessarily say it has to be a social design, that it
now comes together like this in this project, is because it really is about the wish of the people,
but also about the participation in the project, trough the children and the drawings and so on,
this is simply a special project (..) I then call it social value co creation"46
In this she delineates her doings by simultaneously positioning herself as being engaged in SE and as being
engaged in social design. Due to the combination it becomes something special and diferent to her, what she
names social value co creation.
Alex
Contrary toIda and Lis, Alex makes identity claims of being an SEI 47. He refers to a large extent to SE, other
SEIs and their initiatives in his portrayals of himself and his activities. As illustrated by the following:
"if one has an NGO, it is clear from the beginning that proft is not a part, but for us, right
from the beginning, proft is a part of the core, therefore it is a social enterprise" 48
In this narration he describes himself and his doings by a counter positioning with respect to NGOs.
However, his constructions as an SEI are not unambiguous. In fact, he recurrently counter positions himself
towards other SEIs as well. As when he tells to have "kept myself a bit away from this scene"49 when speaking
about other SEIs. He renders what he calls the SE-scene as elitist and that too many people in it allege to
make the world better50. Furthermore, he narrates himself via a counter positioning to other of SEsup’s SEIs,
when he explains to be diferent than those who have unpaid interns 51. Similarly, he pictures himself unlike
other SEIs, who he describes to be more dependent on selling and making money than he is 52, as can be seen
in this quote:
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 754-757, 772-773
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 568-569
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 1171-1173
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 569 – 573, 1032
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 570-573, 1047-1050
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 683- 686
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 631-637
43
"this is a problem again and again for (another specifc SEI), she certainly needs to run afer
her sales numbers and she is a genuine entrepreneur and really though, as great as she is, for
her this is simply business and it has to be like this for her, but this is not where I am at the
moment and I actually do not want to be in that role" 53
By this counter position towards a particular SEI he accentuates himself as less proft-oriented than other
SEIs.
5.1.3. Entrepreneurship, Business and Proft
Afer having broached it by the preceding elaborations of Alex, I now move to an delineation of how all three
construct themselves through recurring claims and positionings in relation and disrelation to normal
entrepreneurship, business and as being proft-oriented.
Ida
Ida makes identity claims of being more chaotic while having more fun, when she constructs herself and her
doings by a counter positioning towards "normal" entrepreneurs. As in those two quotes:
"this is the huge diference to normal entrepreneurs, they come up with a concept and do such
calculations and write a business plan and move numbers around (..) we do not do this at all,
and I think that sometimes falls on our feet, because it gets a bit out of hand and becomes a bit
chaotic"54
"some simply have a small business plan and execute it accordingly, which then either works or
not, and others do it simply diferently, but might have more fun with it" 55
However, her disassociation to entrepreneurs and business is only related to her own skills and activities, as
she elaborates that they currently are searching for a business administrator 56. Tough, as seen in the quote
above, she refers to entrepreneurship and business in regard to activities such as planning and organisation.
She does not use business and entrepreneurship when speaking about being proft-oriented. Indeed, she does
not craf herself and her activities as being driven by such aspects. Tis can be seen in her spare narrations on
53
54
55
56
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 637-641
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 416-421
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 539-541
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 426-432
44
the sales of Ability’s products. But also in her explanation about how she is working on turning Ability into a
non-proft association57. By doing this, she is positioning herself and her doings in distance to Ability’s
current legal form, which is rather a proft-oriented enterprise.
Lis
Unlike Ida, Lis never refers to entrepreneurship. Yet, in parallel, also Lis makes identity claims as more
chaotic and less organised, crafed through a counter positioning to people with a background in business
administrations58 and in sales59. Similarly to Ida, Lis does not see herself and her activity as being market or
proft-oriented. One example on this is the following claim of being design driven:
"in any case, there is more of a design-idea behind it, rather than a marketing-idea, I think, if
we would have done pink princesses, we might have been more successful on the market" 60
By this she crafs herself by a counter position towards being market-oriented. Tough, Lis accentuates
herself as being dependent on the sales of Doll’s product. She does so to a greater extent than Ida. However,
she ascribes this to her desire to increase her focus and the amount efort on her Doll-activities, as can be
seen in the following narration:
"so that I can concentrate on it, I would somehow need to be able to live of it more
comfortably, or simply start to make proft with the project and in order to do that I somehow
need to make a quantum jump from those thousand dolls I sell in a year" 61.
Alex
Diferent than the other two interviewees, Alex describes himself by identity claims of being "commercial"62.
Furthermore, he accentuates himself as being market-oriented when he elaborates that one of the initial
reasons for V-Fence was the lack of a comparable product 63. Moreover, he is positioning his activity close to
what he calls "normal" business, when he states that the same things count for his activities, namely being
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 446-453
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 352-356
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 522-525
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 283-285
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 583-587
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 282
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 12-18
45
proft-oriented64.
Nevertheless, he simultaneously counter positions from what can be associated with mere business, as he
claims himself, not to be a manager, but a designer 65. Tat he narrates himself to be diferent from other SEIs,
who only pursue things for pure proft, was already broached 66. In a similar manner he also disassociates
himself from other companies. One example is his elaboration of the collaboration with an environmental
organisation (EO):
"I have always been a fan, the frst contact with them was fve to six years ago, when I saw a
documentation about them (..) I found their approach, this direct action, so good, they just do
things, I simply liked it, I was always a fan, and at the time when we were looking for a kind of
charity, for us it was clear, that in any case we want to donate one euro to something, this is
obviously also a marketing question, to me it was obvious, that we ask them, and they clearly
ft very well, they combine fghting spirit and sustainability greatly, therefore this suits us and
they also saw that immediately, they also said ok, they are always very reserved when it comes
to sponsoring of companies, because they do not want to sell themselves out, and therefore they
always need to take a close look but they agreed immediately, and said yes, ok, this fts so well,
we do it"67
By starting with his personal interest in the EO, Alex emphasises, that the collaboration is not based on
marketing reasons only. Furthermore, he constructs himself and his doings by a counter-position towards
frms whose support would be unwanted by the EO. Hence, he stresses that he does not understand himself
as being solely proft-oriented.
5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
In this part of the analysis, I document how all three SEIs construct themselves through claims and
positionings as being caring about others and in relation to empowerment.
Ida
Ida starts her account by an identity claim of being caring and as a person who has always wanted to work
64
65
66
67
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 1102 -1103
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 581-580
Outlined in 5.1.2. Social Entrepreneurship and Non-Governmental Organisations
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 305-317
46
with, what she calls "weaker" people. She asserts this through a counter positioning with respect to
others who do not care at all68. Te fact that she starts her account in this fashion underlines the
importance it has for her notions of herself. Another example of how she enacts herself as caring about
others can be seen in her narration about a project she worked on:
"this Lebanese project gets people with disabilities out of their care homes and does those kind
of holiday-events with them, where they receive super intensive care, especially one to one
maintenance, anyhow, there I gathered very intensive experience with people with disabilities
and clearly realised, over there the contrast between disabled people and normal people is
much bigger, they are really far away from society, and are put in care homes (..) being
partially bound to benches, they vegetate and are served some disgusting muck, they simply
have zero-comma-zero quality of life, more accurately the minus-area (..) experiences as such
indeed stimulate me emotionally, give me the strength to change something as well (..) through
this such a thematic main focus was once more determined, that I want to do something
around this theme of disabled people"69
In this elaboration she constructs the actor, i.e. the project in Lebanon, to be caring and saving the people
with disabilities and she positions herself and her activities in relation to this by her assertion of being driven
by similar motives.
Te inclination ofIda to take care of the others can be seen in an interaction during the interview as well.
WhenIda describes the development of Ability, she elaborates that she did so with the intention to change the
sheltered workshops in a manner that would allow better working conditions for people with disabilities 70.
However, she also explains that the initial idea was that she had to develop products, which are easier to be
produced by the people in sheltered workshops 71. But she also accentuates that she quickly realised, that it
would be "much cooler if they did it themselves"72 and variegates her identity claim of being a designer by also
making an identity claim of being empowering others: "I do not want to be the designer, but I would like to
make the people working in the workshops to become designers" 73. When asking Ida to illuminate what I had
understood as a change from the original idea 74, she responds: "that I am not the designer was clear right from
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 39-46
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 60-79
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 125-130
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 215-225
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 225-226
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 236-238
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 252-253
47
the start75. When viewing this interaction as a position-denial (Mishler, 2009, 1989; Davies & Harrè, 1990) I
doubt Ida’s clear intentions by my question. Hence I deny her positioning and her response is an efort to
hold on to the positioning she considers reasonable in regard to herself (Ibid.), the positioning as caring
about and empowering others.
Another example of how she narrates identity claims of herself and her activities being empowering
others is her description of the regular working tasks in the sheltered workshop as boring and monotonous.
Upon this negative impression she crafs her own activities as inspiring and empowering for the people:
"those people, who get the opportunity to do their own designs now, these designs, on many
levels, give them a lot, so namely recognition, which before they usually would not have been
given, as a result of developing something, they realise, I am capable and I can create
something, which also somehow is desired in the world (..) and I am able to apply my personal,
my individual abilities (..) this is the enormous value of our work"76
Trough this she constructs herself and her doings as needed by them in order to become empowered.
Another feature in Ida’s account is that she speaks so much about the meanings and implications Ability
has for other people, while she fairly speaks about more practical and organisation aspects. Indeed, these are
of minor importance to her. Tis impression is also gained by the way she speaks about the relevance of the
products. She never speaks of their prominence in relation to making an earning for herself or Ability. She
portrays those to be of importance only for the people in the sheltered workshops due to the empowering
process, which happens while the people are creating the products 77. Similar can be seen, when she shortly
refers to the workload, which the fnishing of the products carries along for her. Hereupon she stops herself
by "but this difculty is somehow of topic now" 78. Trough this she accentuates that such rather practical and
Ability internal aspects are of minor importance for her notion of herself.
Lis
Lis constructs herself as caring about others as well. She makes identity claims as being somebody who listens
to other people’s needs, as in this quote:
75
76
77
78
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 254
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 258 - 267
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 191-210, 256-258, 268-305
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 316 - 317
48
"I certainly just spoke to the people, listened what do they actually want, which certainly is a
very important, very important point, I think this is the only possible approach, so if someone
somehow thinks, I want to do something good on the other side of the world, in inverted
commas, and then comes up with something which is totally detached from the local people’s
actual needs and what they want or wish, this is just a bit abstruse"79
She sets her own doings apart by a counter positioning towards others, which she portrays as acting detached
from the wish of people. By her use of "inverted commas" she anticipates that while she could be understood
as such, she does not comprehend herself as somebody, just trying to do something good on the other side of
the world. Tis can also be seen, as she follows with:
"what I in fact fnd so beautiful about my project is that it really is about the people there and
about the realisation of their wishes"80
Telling so, she verbally emphasises "there" and "their". Due to this she additionally stresses her claim of being
and doing diferently than others.
Lis also narrates herself as caring about others through a description of the bad local school conditions in
India81. Due to this, she not only accentuates herself through identity claims of working for better physical
conditions. Furthermore and similar to Ida, Lis claims herself to be promoting free thinking and creativity as
well. Moreover, Lis makes identity claims as creating better, self-sustaining and empowering conditions for
the woman at the local production site 82 and as standing up for greater equality and freedom in regard of
gender83.
Another aspect in Lis’ account by which it can be seen that she conceptualises herself as caring about
other people, is the way she speaks about Doll’s products. An instance of this is the following citation. In this
she makes identity claims of being open towards the product and as having a greater focus on the project and
the process:
"it is not so much about the product, even though my background is in product design, but it is
more about the project and the process, I have a relatively open mind for what the product is
79
80
81
82
83
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 117-123
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 124-125
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 152-163
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 404-410
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 183-187, 236-283
49
supposed to become, this certainly is a completely diferent approach than it is normally the
case"84
She strengthens this identity claim as she crafs it around the counter position of what is usually done in
product design, which she portrays as not having a focus on the people 85. In a similar manner she narrates
herself as active for the cause of other people’s needs and empowerment by the way she makes identity claims
of her own insignifcance. One example of this is the following quote:
"what I fnd so important and so beautiful, is that such a structure has been developed, which
works well, which is self-contained, which is locally, no matter if I drop dead and do not do it
anymore (..) and if you ask me how much I am involved, it is not that much, and I do not
want to be, and I cannot be from here, and indeed it is not about realising what I came up
with, but rather about, what somehow happens there, what is wanted there, with me or
without me"86
Lis’ stories centre more on practical, organisational aspects than Ida’s. However, when Lis speaks about such,
she does so mainly in connection of the product design process. Tis further punctuates that being a
professional designer is of relevance to her notion of herself 87.
Tat other practical aspects are of minor gravity can be seen in an interaction during the interview; I ask
her to illuminate how the work is organised between her and the people in India 88. She only shortly is
responsive to this question89. Ten she starts a longer elaboration on the meaning of Doll and the hereto
related foundation for the people in India 90. She only returns to the initial question with the preceding quote
about her own insignifcance. Tis turn away from my question is a way to express what she thinks the
question actually should be about so that it becomes meaningful to her (Mishler, 1999). By turning away
from my practical oriented question she makes the identity claim that those aspects are of minor concern to
her notion of herself.
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 773-779
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 779-808
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 430-445
Outlined in 5.1.1. Arts, Creativity and Design
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 369-370
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 373-375
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 375-430
50
Alex
Alex constructs himself as caring about others as well. He makes identity claims as being considerate about
reasonable working conditions on the production site. While he elaborates that the actual implementation of
this is still limited, he stresses that this is due to a current non-existence of a producer, who at the same time
ofers products of good quality and is fair trade certifed. Furthermore he explains that he intends to change
this in the future91. Similarly he makes claims as concerned about the appropriated compensation of others.
One instance of such is his elaboration of not wanting to have an unpaid intern 92. Another example is his
apprehension of having to focus more on generating a proft in the future, so to pay employees 93.
Tough, these are the only times he narrates himself as caring about other people and he does not speak
about empowerment at all.
5.1.5. Sustainability, Ecology and Animal Protection
In this part of the analysis I document how the SEIs describe notions of themselves through claims and
positionings in relation to themes as sustainability, ecology and animal protection.
Ida
Ida speaks about sustainability, but does not do so in reference to environmental concerns, but only in
contemplation of how stable and long lasting changes Ability creates 94. Nevertheless, she does not use the
word sustainability in relation to ecology; she does make identity claims as ecologically concerned. An
instance where she does so is her quoted narration on not wanting to be a designer who only produces
rubbish95. As she only does so once, this does not have a stronger relevance for Ida’s conceptualisation of
herself. Te same counts for animal protection, which she does not mention at all.
Lis
Lis speaks about sustainability through a hypothetical elaboration of how she would work, if she would work
as a classical product designer96. By this she makes the identity claim of being ecologically conscious.
However and similar to Ida, this is of minor importance to her understanding of herself, as she only makes
91
92
93
94
95
96
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 141-150, 177-178, 592-593
Outlined in 5.1.2. Social Entrepreneurship and Non-Governmental Organisations
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 641-642
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 146-148
Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 779-781
51
such claims once and not in relation to her current activities (Mishler, 1999). Furthermore also Lis does not
speak about animal protection.
Alex
Contrary toIda and Lis, Alex accentuates himself as sustainable with a great emphasis, especially of being
vegan. While he speaks little of animal rights concerns or how veganism supports animals’ welfare, he makes
identity claims about his own activism in relation to such aspects. Claims, which resound the EO’s direct
action approach, which he explains to be a fan of 97. For example, he makes identity claims of always having
been ecologically and sustainably conscious and active 98, of avoiding leather where it is possible99, of recently
having become a vegan and of having been a vegetarian for many years previously 100. Te last two claims are
constructed around a counter position to other people who do fencing. By this he underlines that contrary to
those people he does not consider himself as being driven by health reasons only. Furthermore, he makes
identity claims as extreme and radical101. Upon my request to elaborate what he means by this, he refers to
the implications of the collaboration with the EO:
"in many countries they are somehow just associated with terrorism and therefore haunted
and we always get a lot of critique as well, especially many Americans are very critical, where
we simply stand by it, where we say no, they belong to us, we keep doing this and if we lose
customers because of that we do not care, so we are indeed relatively more political maybe
than many other sports (..) many people simply think those are terrorists and we support
criminals and then do not speak to us anymore, so we already had people who also somehow
stopped working with us, because we just support them, that happens indeed, what I would not
have thought, but that is how it is then (..) they save a thousand animals a year, who fnds that
bad is in my eyes just a bad person, with this I am relatively consequent"102
In doing so, he also claims himself as being political and consequent, strengthened by vocal emphasis of these
words and by constructing himself in a counter-positioning to other sports brands.
Simultaneously, Alex also anticipates that it can be questioned how ecological his doings are as the apparel
97
98
99
100
101
102
Outlined in 5.1.3. Entrepreneurship, Business and Proft
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 575-576
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 9-10
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 218-221
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 242-244
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 269-273, 283-285, 291-293
52
is made of plastic103. Upon this, he follows with an identity claim of working on becoming better. He
documents this claim by an elaboration of V-Fence’s gradual development towards ecological printing and
banking104. By this reference, Alex accentuates that his notion of being sustainable is resting on such more
operational decisions as well. Indeed, Alex also uses the word sustainability in relation to the before
mentioned concerns about the working conditions on the production side. Hence, he narrates himself as
being sustainable not only through his elaborations of being environmental and animal protective, but also
through his claims of caring about other people.
5.2. Functions of Other People
In the preceding investigation of the frst emphasis, I made use of the concepts identity claims and
positionings, so to describe the meaning other people have for the three SEI’s constructions of their own
orientation and for the cause of their doings. By the second emphasis, I now turn the focus on how the three
SEIs narrate other people to have functions in regard of how they understand themselves and of their course
of having become what they are (Mishler, 1999)105.
Before moving to each SEI, I want to point out a parallel between the three of them. Tey all construct
other people as having a function in their activities. As could be seen in some of the earlier quotes, all three
mostly refer to "we" when they speak about their initiatives. Hence, all three have a collective rather than an
individualistic understanding of what they are doing. Furthermore, they all describe that other people had a
function in the initiation and development of their activities. How they do so in their particular manner is
documented in the following.
Ida
Ida understands her experiences with weaker people, especially those with disabilities, as having had an
important infuence on her activities 106. Moreover,Ida describes, that she initiated Ability together with a
fellow student107. Furthermore, she anticipates that they did not develop the initial idea of Ability for the
people working in the sheltered workshop. But she underlines those people’s function by saying that they did
103
104
105
106
107
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 264-269
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 171-181
Outlined in 3.6.2. Functions of other People
Outlined in 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 374-375
53
it "together” with six of them108. Finally she constructs a family friend as a function in relation to how Ability’s
cooperation with companies had come about109.
Lis
Lis’ narrations about the initiation of Doll centre on the function of other people. An example of this is the
beginning of the interview. Lis prefatory asks for more specifc questions. I suggest that she could talk about
her motivations or situations which were of importance for what she is doing today 110. Upon this she replies:
"how the frst contact was made?"111. My proposal ofers the possibility to start wherever she wants. By starting
with the contact, she stresses that this is of signifcance for her (Mishler, 1999). Indeed, and contrary to Ida,
who narrates herself as driven by the desire to take care about others since early on, Lis describes the
initiation and development of her activities as infuenced by the people, especially the people in India. She
emphasises their function by elaborating that she did not have a clear intention to start a Social Design or a
SE-initiative. Moreover she demonstrates this through the elaboration of a hypothetical product design
oriented path for her. She portrays this path as the one, which rather would have been expected from her and
which would have been reasonable for her as well112.
A diferent way how other people have a function in Lis’ accentuation of herself and her activities is by her
elaborations of being alone. In her account, she twice stresses that she is not able to do things on her own and
that she needs other people’s help 113. In extension she crafs other people as having a function in relation to
her motivation, when she reasons that meeting like-minded-people via SEsup energized her114.
Alex
Also Alex’s account is traversed by elaborations of how other people and especially friends had been and still
are of importance for his understanding of himself and his activities.
Alex constructs friends as having a function in the initiation and development of his activities. He tells
that he did not intend to start an SE-initiative as well, but just wanted to make some apparel for his friends
and himself115. Similarly, he narrates people as a function in relation to how the collaboration with the EO
came into being:
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 384-387
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 734-745, Outlined in the forthcoming 5.4. Happenstances
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 1-15
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 16
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 740-748
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 574-579, 591-595
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 641-652
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 21-23
54
"we simply got to know the German EO and then simply agreed on a personal level, also such a
lucky coincidence, if we would not have met them, they would not be our partners now"116
Another similar example is his elaboration of how getting to know people makes him proud 117 and gives him
pleasure in his work118. Furthermore, Alex stresses his colleague Eva’s function in relation to his activities.
Alex reasons that he would not be where he is today if it was not for her 119. In line, he describes that
acquaintances and friends have a valuable function 120. He narrates that they make it possible that he does not
have to compromise regarding his believes about good working conditions and that he can elude his fears:
"I do not like to tell people what they should do, because I do not believe that this is benefcial
(..) therefore I prefer having acquaintances or friends who simply engage, like it is with Eva
now, who I tell what to do as well, of course, but this is on a diferent level, it simply is very
amicably, whereas having somebody who is external, one who is paid and then perhaps in a
way not good enough, I have a lot of fear about this, because I would not know how to handle
this"121
As Lis, also Alex speaks about the environment of like-minded people which he has obtained through SEsup.
Tough, he crafs this to have an infuence on the initialisation of his activities also, as he reasons that this
environment gave him the idea to found V-Fence 122. Moreover, he renders that other people are a function
for his ongoing engagement, as he reasons that he would have given up on V-Fence without them 123. Finally,
he depicts other SEIs’ function in regard of his learning, as he tells that being surrounded and watching other
SEIs dealing with their problems helped him to handle his own 124.
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 324-327
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 463-474
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 1087-1094
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 403-409
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 442-453
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 650-662
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 876-882
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 946-953
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 898-907
55
5.3. Difculties
Already through the quoted citations in the foregone sections it was insinuated that the three’s accounts are
circling around difculties. Trough the third emphasis I present those in greater detail.
For this purpose I make use of Mishler’s vocabulary on diverse desires caused by diferent sub-identity
constructions as exhibited through the forgone analysis, but I also describe other requirements. I document
how those implicate elaborations on contradictions, tensions and doubts (1999).
Moreover I describe how the SEIs handle difculties by narrations of integration, alignment, balancing,
separation and compromising but also by turning focus on how such led to depictions of discontinuities and
transitions by pointing out how the three recount de-tours and how those are plotted as being on line or of
line from the current narrative perspective as present through the interview (1999) 125.
Ida
Ida claims and positions herself as both creative and caring about others and their empowerment 126. By this
she constructs two sub-identities which are integrated, as was seen in her narratives about product design as
a creative path to reach a change of other people’s conditions 127. Tough, this integration is not a one-time
act but has to be accomplished over and over (Mishler, 1999). One example of this is her narrative on doing
an internship128. She outlines that she had gone for a more classic product design internship because of her
design related desire. In this she depicts a discontinuity in contemplation to her portrayed desire of wanting
to care about others. However, she states that she needed to do the internship in order to make the decision
once more and very consciously, that she wants to use design to make a social diference 129. By this, she crafs
a transition towards what she is doing today. Hence, she outlines a de-tour which she re-plots as being online in terms of her current situation (Ibid.).
Another instance where it can be seen that the integration of her identities has to be accomplished time
afer time is the presented interaction130. I threatened the integration andIda once more had to accentuate
that she is not a normal designer, but a designer who wants to empower others (Mishler, 1999).
125 Outlined in 3.6.3. Difculties
126 Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design & 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
127…Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
128 Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
129 Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
130 Outlined in 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
56
Ida’s account also centres around other difculties. One such example is a metaphor of a blooming desert by
which she portrays her activities and the difculties she faces hereby:
"this is actually a very good metaphor, because it is not so easy to get water into the desert, so
one can be occupied quite a long time, and this is also a bit annoying about the job, to create
the possibility to do so"131
Aspects which create such annoyances are reoccurring in Ida’s elaborations. For example does she craf a
doubt when she narrates that she is not able to decide if the products are necessary or not 132, as they demand
a lot of work from her as well133. Furthermore, she constructs tensions and a need to compromise in relation
to fnancial aspects. An instance of such is her elaboration of how they make a salary. She explains that they
never get the budgets which would be necessary to run Ability, which to her implies a need to ponder
between the resources attainable and the desired efects of the Ability-sessions 134.
Ida not only crafs tensions due to fnancial limitations in relation to the benefts for others, but also in
relation to Ability’s internal afairs. She depicts a contradiction and a doubt when she elaborates that they
mainly work with volunteers. She portrays those having a greater commitment because of the Ability’s cause,
while simultaneously not being able to be held responsible 135. However she also anticipates that while it is
currently not possible, she does have ideas on how to be able to pay employees in the future 136. She illustrates
such idea as to cooperate with frms 137. However, her portrayal of this as a possible solution in order to
counter fnancial limitations is also marked by doubts and contradictions. Moreover, it is constructed around
the need to compromise as can be seen in the following quote:
"I believe one can do it like this maybe, or I might tell you something diferent in a year from
now, but it actually is quite a good coup, in any case it is much more inclusive, because then
we really and fully open the sheltered workshops (..) but one always needs to weigh up between
starry-eyed idealism and idiotism for sure, so one does not burn oneself for an idea, which can
only be sustainable when it is done more than once, but there are ways to do this,
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 668-674
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 289-348
5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 549-578
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 494-516
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 522-531
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 578-582
57
absolutely"138.
In thisIda delineates doubts and contradictions, in particular in relation to her positioning as somebody
critical of capitalism139 by emphasising her own reservations, but also by highlighting the benefts, this
contemplation has for the sheltered workshop.
Even though Ida’s narratives are traversed by difculties, she also balances these by more positive
impressions. As described, she repetitively constructs herself as active and presents solutions, including
hypothetical, potential ones for the future.
Finally,Ida reasons several times that they are pursuing a "favela-approach"140 afer having spoken about
more problematic and challenging aspects. She describes this expression as an image for something which is
not planned and not organized, but works nevertheless 141. Moreover, the frst time she uses the term, I
respond with "nice word"142 so to encourage her to elaborate how she avails it. Trough this interaction we
mutually create a positive meaning for this term and her recurring use of it can be seen as a narrative
balancing of problematic topics (Mishler, 1999).
Lis
Also Lis constructs two sub-identities through her claims and positions as a creative and as care taking of
others and their empowerment143. However, and in diference to Ida, Lis narrates herself as rather being
product design-oriented, whereas she outlines her notion as being concerned about others in relation to her
Doll-activities144. Hence, Lis handles her sub-identities through a greater separation in regard of diverse
activities. (Mishler, 1999) Trough at times, when she speaks about her Doll-activities she also aligns her
identities in a manner so that they support each other (Mishler, 1999). One instance is Lis’ reference to her
other artistic activities when describing decisions made for Dolls 145. Nonetheless, Lis also narrates conficts
between those identities in regard of her Doll activities. An example of such confict is her elaboration of
having wanted to move the Doll idea to other places in the world. She explains that this desire belongs to the
designer in her, but that this desire is in contradiction to her desire to create as much social impact as
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 582-593
Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 414, 501, 535, 595
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 599-608
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 414
Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design & 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design & 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment & 5.2.Function of Other People
Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
58
possible for the people in India146.
Lis narrates contradiction also in regard of her conceptualisation of being caring about others and their
empowerment. She constructs herself and her Doll activities as settled in a complex net of diferent desires.
One example of this is when she reasons that being more successful on the market could have led to a greater
social impact in India. However, she also narrates that this would have meant to compromise with the desire
to promote individually and to stand in for equality and freedom in regard of gender 147. She constructs a
similar need to compromise in her elaboration of why she considered it important not to have a donationbased model:
"for me it is important that this is not a donation based model, marketing-wise or in
conformity with the market, maybe it would be better if I would produce glittery, pink
princesses in china, which I could sell very cheaply and would make so much money that I
could send an incredibly amount of money to India, this would perhaps make my life easier,
this would potentially, I do not know, somehow make the cash fow to India, yes, maybe the
school would have been built already or whatever, solely by my means, yes, but one has to
make decisions and say, what is important to me personally, and for me it is simply important
not to donate, but for me it is important to pay work fairly"148
In this she portrays competing desires between her own life, the dream to build the school and fair payment
to woman in India. Moreover, by this elaboration she crafs difculties due to fnancial limitations. She not
only links those to unfulflled desires regarding her Doll-activities, but also to her own life situation. In
extension she depicts those to cause her doubts on the value of her doings, as can be seen in the following
citation:
"nowadays I think, I would not involve myself in that anymore, because, well, let us say it like
this, because I am not that naive anymore, no, because now, I somehow have some years of job
experiences behind me, because I somehow know, that my time is somehow of value and that I
need to look out that I am able to pay my rent and so on, and somehow actually cannot involve
myself in so adventurous things, where I do not know what is coming out of it, yes, so back then
146 Appendix VIII.II., L.: 445-471
147 Appendix VIII.II., L.: 283-292
148 Appendix VIII.II., L.: 293-302
59
it somehow was like that, I just had founded my frm right afer my studies and had somehow,
also such an adventure-naivity, adventure-thirst combined with naivity, so maybe this is also
what it requires, in order to involve yourself in something like this, it certainly is sad that I now
say I probably would not involve myself in something like this anymore, but that has simply
and also certainly a bit to do with arriving in reality or something"149
She fnishes these consideration with an abrupt "I do not know"150 and a stressed "however"151 and turns to an
elaboration of the project’s meaning for the benefciaries in India 152. Due to this, but also due to her
reasoning of having arrived in "reality", she depicts doubts which she is not able to resolve. By this, Lis
narrates her Doll activities as an of-line de-tour which she is not able to re-plot from her current narrative
situation (Mishler, 1999).Though, only in contemplation of her ability to sustain herself, not regarding the
value her doings have for other people.
Lis’ notion of herself and her activities can also be seen in the manner she balances her narrations on
difculties. Lis on an ongoing basis makes identity claims as active and as putting in a lot of efort. She
describes in details, how she had tried to fnd solutions. She tells how she had worked on getting fnancial
support through investors153 and foundations154. Moreover, she exemplifes how she had attempted to move
the project to other places of the world 155. Furthermore, she outlines the SEsup scholarship as one of many
things she had tried in order to counteract being on her own 156. However, in none of these narrations she
does present a positive efect upon her endeavours. Furthermore, and diferent to Ida, she does not construct
positive outlooks for the future at any time. By this the bearing of her doubts about her activities become
even more realisable (Mishler, 1999).
Alex
Alex narrates himself and his activities as being creative, sustainable, entrepreneurial, caring about others,
but also radical, political and active at the same time. His portrayal enables to integrate his manifold subidentities and their desires. However, at times, for him the handling of those is not easy and is not a onetime-act but an ambivalent, continuously changing processes (Mishler, 1999). One example where this can be
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 91-102
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 102-103
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 103
Outlined in 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 331-344
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 495-502
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 474-493, 502-510
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 574-587
60
seen is his elaboration of having wanted to fnd an apparel producer, who simultaneously fulflled the desire
to have of a good product and of good working conditions. While the current producer is sweatshop free, the
desire to have a fair trade certifed producer is so far unfulflled 157. Hence, in this narration he handles the
conficting desires by compromising.
Similar toIda and Lis, also Alex crafs conficts between his desires and requirements as caused by fnancial
limitations. As for example, when he tells that the current lack of an income through V-Fence requires that
he does other free-lance design jobs as well. He explains that this is colliding with the attention V-Fence
demands158. Another example of how Alex accentuates fnancial limitations as the cause of conficts, is his
narration on having to hire employees soon 159. In this, he explains that hiring people would require that he
needs to focus more on making a proft, which however, is in contradiction with his notion of himself as not
wanting to be proft-oriented 160. Moreover he portrays a confict, as he explains not being able to pay an as
high salary as he would like to 161. Tis leads him to reason about how they always have to make compromises.
Simultaneously, he also portrays doubts in regard of such reasoning:
"so it is always this compromise, because one still needs to be economical as well, it also is not
sustainable if we are broke in three months, anyway, especially this argument that we are not
sustainable if we do not earn enough money, especially in this scene, one can hear that every so
ofen, everything is justifed by this (..) like that everything can be ironed out, whereby one
obviously needs to be careful"162
By this, he narrates himself as sceptical towards the argument of having to compromise, while he is not able
to resolve his doubts.
Besides the fnancial aspects, Alex outlines contradictions as caused by his desires and other competing
requirements related to his activities. One example of this is his elaboration of not having pursued V-Fence
in the beginning:
157
158
159
160
161
162
Appendix VIII.III., L.142-181 & Outlined in 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 361-366
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 705-708
Outlined in 5.1.2. Social Entrepreneurship and Non-Governmental Organisations & 5.1.3. Entrepreneurship, Business and Proft
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 682-705
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 730-737
61
"I panicked because I had not even registered a business or something, it was simply, ok, I have
them now, I put them out there straight away and then I do it step by step, but because it
simply was such a direct success, I panicked and then I just lef it for the time being (..) despite
of that I frst did not follow up on it because I was still designing, yes, I had orders and jobs
and was not able to immerse myself into a new enterprise from one day to another" 163
Tis story is narrated as a disruption which he sketches as caused by the inability to accomplish bureaucratic
and time requirement. It is crafed as an of-line de-tour, as he does not ascribe a meaning to it in
ratiocination to his current doings (Mishler, 1999). Indeed, even afer having taken up on the idea again, Alex
still portrays bureaucratic aspects and organisational responsibilities as in objection to his preferred design
related duties164 and in contradiction to the way he wants to live his life. He resonates that such requirement
almost had led to that he had given up on V-Fence again 165. Hence, he constructs those requirements as in
strong confict with his understanding of himself. Furthermore, Alex sets such experiences in afliation to
doubts about the future. Tis can be seen in his anticipations of similar but bigger challenges when entering
into the US-market166. In doing so, he narrates doubts about this enterprise as it could be too risky.
Alex also portrays difculties as caused by false assumptions and prejudice. He crafs costumers to consider
their products to be more ecological than they actually are. By this, he narrates a requirement of constant and
transparent communication, so to work against false assumptions about them 167. Furthermore, he describes
that they are faced with two felds of prejudices; veganism and fencing 168 Alex tells that they, due to the
combination of those, are confronted with the accusation to be insincere169. He pictures this as a problem also
in conjunction to their fnancial situation. He narrates that those prejudices and false assumptions about
them, cause them difculties to get support from investors and other funding sources 170.
His diverse desires, but also the competing requirements he faces, make Alex portray his understanding of
himself as ambiguous and under constant negotiation with the environment, but also with himself. One
instance of the frst can be seen is his elaboration of how he fnds it difcult to describe what he is doing.
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 42-47, 55-57
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 427-436, 529-533
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 415-418
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 480-512, 983-997
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 164-173
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 770-771
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 784-785
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 780-784, 796-818
62
Terefore, he explains he does adapt his story according to the person he tells it to 171. An example of the
second is his description of how he engages in mediations with himself, so to be able to handle that they will
need to have employees in the future 172. Moreover, he portrays that his notion of V-Fence and of himself has
changed as a consequences of these ambiguities and negotiations. Tis can be seen in his elaboration of
having changed V-Fence’s name. He reasons this by having realised that they want to embrace other sports as
well, which he delineates as unfeasible with the initial name 173. Another example of his modifed
understanding of himself, is his elucidation on how he just a year ago saw V-Fence as a hobby, even though
he earned money with it. While now, he explains to behold V-Fence more seriously and himself more as
growing into the role of being an entrepreneur 174.
Beside these ongoing negotiations and changes of conceptualisations, Alex also balances his narratives
about difculties by more positive ones. Examples of this are his elaborations on the gradual improvement in
regard of turning their producer into being fair trade certifed 175 and of ecological printing and banking 176.
Furthermore, he recurrently forecasts that many bureaucratic and organisational tasks only need to be done
once177. Due to this, he crafs positive outlooks for the future similar to Ida.
5.4. Happenstances
By this last emphasis, I present how Ida, Lis and Alex’s accounts are marked by elaborations of what I capture
a s happenstances. Tis description is done by turning focus on how they speak about luck, chance,
coincidence and the right circumstances and by an attention to how they narrate themselves as having become
SEIs by accidental self-discovery, rather than by deliberated search (Mishler, 1999)178.
Ida
As described, Ida narrates herself as having wanted to work with weaker people since early on 179. While this is
a story of deliberated search, Ida ’s depiction of herself as having become an SEI and of her activities as such,
are simultaneously marked by portrayals of luck and coincidence. One example is her elaboration of the need
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 563-568
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 647-650
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 236-257
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 600-626
Outlined in 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
Outlined in 5.1.5.Sustainability, Ecology and Animal Protection
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 420-421,427-428, 971-979
Outlined in 3.6.4. Happenstances
Outlined in 5.1.4. Caring about Others and Empowerment
63
to have a good working base in order to make a social change possible 180 .Upon this she concludes:
"I was defnitely lucky with the frst sheltered workshop, a lot was possible there"181
Hence, she concurrently crafs an accidental self-discovery. Another instance of this is the already mentioned
recount of how the collaboration with frms came into being 182:
"again, more by coincidence, I started to think about, together with a friend of my parents, so
he leads a medium sized company, or is the manager and as a private person he was always a
bit interested in what I am doing with Ability and then I told him that one could also think
about this as a training program for his executive staf"183.
Tis elaboration is constructed around the coincidence of having spoken to him.
However, simultaneously she also underlines that it was her idea, that it was her who approached the
friend and that the collaboration came into being due to the interesting feature of her doings . By this she
emphasises that she does not conceive this depiction as having come into being through cheer chance.
Lis
Also Lis narrations are traversed by coincidence and the right circumstances. All together, these make her
story about having become an SEI to an accidental self-discovery, rather than a story of deliberation. She
narrates that she had not intended to found Doll, but considers it to be born out of the circumstances in
India184. Furthermore, she portrays the circumstance as the cause for her journey to India. She describes that
it had been the right mix of having fnished her studies and thirst for adventure, which had made her go on
this journey. Moreover, her depiction of having met the person who encouraged her to go to India is crafed
around coincidence:
"in a way it was a total coincidence, in a way just through totally personal, well through
relationships, by having been there, and somehow also the work I showed was just appealing,
180
181
182
183
184
Outlined in 5.3. Difculties
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 691-718
Outlined in 5.2. Function of Other People
Appendix VIII.I., L.: 734-739
Outlined in 5.2. Functions of Other People
64
and a human component solely"185
Additionally, she even delineates the frst contact to this person as having come about due to the
circumstances. She reasons that the fnancial crisis in 2008 caused that she had nothing to do on the fare 186
and hence had time to speak with this person 187. However, as seen in the quote above, she simultaneously
crafs the contact to the person as induced by her activity and her appealing work. Tus, also Lis does not
make sense of these happenstances as having come into being solely by cheer chance.
Alex
Also Alex’s rendering of having become an SEI is a story on accidental self-discovery, rather than one of
deliberated search. Also, he depicts himself as not having intended to become an SEI and attributes the origin
of his activities to the right circumstance188. He describes those circumstances by not having been able to fnd
similar apparel and not having been able to order just a small amount 189. Furthermore, he reasons that it was
the right timing in regard of the outer circumstances, as he assumes that people would not have wanted
vegan products fve years ago190.
Moreover, he also assembles his narrations along having been lucky. One instance of this is his narration
on how the collaboration with the EO came into being 191. Another example is the following about how he
found a good producer:
"when the apparel arrived, I saw that the quality was really extremely good, which also was
confrmed by (a fencing ware distributor), they had never seen such good apparel made from
artifcial leather, so there was also a lot of luck involved, but this is simply a character attribute
one needs to bring along as well, that one thinks, ok I have this idea now, I am just going to do
it now"192
Similar toIda and Lis, also Alex indicates that he does not deem these happenstances as having emerged by
cheer chance only. In the quote above, he infers that those are infuenced by his own character as somebody
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 57-61
Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
Appendix VIII.II., L.: 29-37
Outlined in 5.2. Funtions of Other People
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 13-18, 21-23
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 86-95
Outlined in 5.2. Funtions of Other People
Appendix VIII.III., L.: 132-136
65
who just does things. Moreover, he contemplates that V-Fence developed successfully because of his
professional skills and abilities as well193.
Afer this presentation of what I found in Ida, Lis and Alex’s accounts, I now advance to the discussions and
conclusions of this.
193 Outlined in 5.1.1. Creativity and Design
66
6. Discussions and Conclusions
In this chapter I summarise and discuss the previous analysis of Ida, Lis and Alex’s narratives in regard of the
four emphases and relate my fndings to similar investigations. Finally this leads me to an answer on the
main research question.
6.1. Summary and Discussion of the Four Emphases
6.1.1. Identity Claims and Positionings
I start the presentation of the analysis with identity claims and positionings. At frst by showing in specifc
how Ida, Lis and Alex construct such around the themes of arts, creativity, design and being poetic.
Ida claims herself to be creative and to be a product designer, yet distinguishes herself from people who
study fne arts and specifes her position in product design as less selfsh. Lis claims herself to be a
professional designer and explicates her doings through her other design projects. Further she claims herself
to have an artistic and poetic approach. Like Ida, Lis simultaneously sets herself and her activities apart from
normal product design. Alex, similar to Lis, claims himself to be a creative professional, though in graphic
design, and describes himself as somebody who lives out his creative desires.
Next I illustrate how the SEIs of this thesis make use of SE, other SEIs, social enterprises and NGOs in order
to construct themselves and their activities.
Parkinson and Howorth (2008) found that the SEIs in their study directly and vehemently disrelate
themselves from SE and being SEIs, even though they were nominated as such by a SE-support organisation.
I did not fnd this tendency in the accounts of the thesis’ SEIs. Quite to the contrary, these individuals use
alignments with SE, SE-initiatives and other SEIs in order to construct themselves. However, this does not
mean that they unambiguously establish themselves as SEIs. Rather, neither Ida nor Lis clearly locate
themselves and their doings within the feld of SE.Ida aligns herself with a social enterprise only in one
occasion: by a counter-position towards an NGO. Similar counts for Lis, who elaborates her idea of SE,
though she does not clearly relate herself to it. Moreover, Lis positions her activities to be diferent from a SE,
as she characterises them as social design as well. Ida’s and Lis’ disassociation is relatively plainer than the
67
one of Alex, who constructs himself as an SEI. However, also his narrations as such are ambiguous, as he
simultaneously sets himself apart from SE and other SEI’s.
Tird, I point out that all three SEIs make use of themes such as entrepreneurship, business and proft, in
order to create their own identity claims and positionings.
Ida claims and positions herself and her doings as distinct from normal businesses regarding the degree of
organisation and planning. Albeit, she reckons that more planning and organisation would be of value for
her activities. Similarly, Lis positions herself as distinct from people with a background in business
administration and in sales. As part of this disassociation she makes identity claims of being chaotic in the
way she tries to manage multiple things at the same time and eventually having less overview over them.
Tus, also in her case, she refers to business and sales, when speaking about organisation and planning.
Besides, both Ida and Lis disassociate themselves from regular businesses in regard of being strongly market
and proft -oriented. Ida does almost not speak about the sales of the products and aligns her activities with a
NPO. Lis narrates herself in a greater dependence on the sales of the products than Ida does. Tough she
explains this as conditioned by the fact that an increase in sales would mean a greater ability to support the
people in India. Moreover, she distances herself from being purely market and proft-oriented, through the
positioning of being rather design-oriented.
Contrary to this, Alex positions himself as related to such spheres. He claims his activities to be
commercial and he constructs himself as being more market-oriented than the other two. Further, he
positions himself in kinship to normal businesses. However, Alex’s narrations are ambiguous, as he the same
time disassociates himself from business and being proft-oriented. He does not understand himself as a
manager and constructs himself as being diferent than others who are purely proft-oriented.
Fourth, I describe how the three SEIs construct themselves and their activities by identity claims positionings
as being caring about others and in relation to empowerment.
Alex does not speak about empowerment and while he crafs himself as being caring about others, he
does so to a lower degree than Ida and Lis. Tose two emphasise their notions of themselves as being
concerned about others and their empowerment. Both of them craf such notions through claims of their
limited involvement and signifcance. Furthermore, both of them construct themselves as caring about others
by the way they construct the value of their initiatives’ product in contemplation of other people. Moreover,
both’s notions of themselves as caring and empowering become particularly clear by the given condition that
they speak very little about more practical and organisational aspects.
68
Te conjuncture that Ida and Lis construct themselves and their doings as caring about others is
consistent with the fndings of Parkinson and Howorth (2008). Tey argue that SEIs construct their identity
and their activities around a stewardship function (p. 299). Te fndings of the thesis moreover echo
Parkinson and Howorth’s work, especially in regard of the identity claims and positionings of Ida and Lis in
relation to entrepreneurship, business and proft. As argued by Parkinson and Howorth (2008) also these two
SEIs construct the legitimacy for themselves and their doings in relation to a social, rather than a proft and
economical -orientation.
Nevertheless, this similarity between Ida and Lis, the way they construct themselves in regard to such a
stewardship function is diferent. Lis does not describe the conditions of the benefciaries as negative and in
need of preservation. Additionally Lis does not craf her activities’ empowering efect to the same extent as
Ida does. Further, Lis stresses her own involvement in the design process to a greater extent than Ida, while at
the same time Lis’ emphasis of her own signifcance for the overall project is stronger than Ida’s. Moreover,
in contrast to Ida, Lis also constructs herself to be working for greater gender equality and freedom.
Finally, I show how the three narrate themselves by identity claims positionings in regard of sustainability,
ecology and animal protection
I fnd that such aspects are of minor or no concern for Ida and Lis, while they are of great importance for
Alex’s notion of himself. To link it back to Parkinson and Howorth (2008) it can be said, that he constructs
himself in relation to a stewardship function as well, though in his case, it mainly concerns a protection of the
environment and of animals.
To conclude on the analysis in regard of the frst emphasis, two aspects are worth to mention in relation to
previous similar research.
At frst, that the way in which the three SEIs construct themselves - by relating and disrelating themselves
to others and their doings - is resembling Dey (1998), Jones et al. (2007) and Strauch’s (2009, 2012) works.
Tey also found that SEIs make use of positive-negative relations and polarisations in order to narratively
construct themselves and their activities.
Second, contrary to Jones et al.’s (2007) fndings, none of SEIs in the thesis made intense use of
theoretical, philosophical or political explanations for themselves and their activities. Following Jones et al.’s
(2007) reasoning it can be said that Ida, Lis and Alex do not construct themselves as strongly ideological
inclined people. However, even though they do not make such reasoning explicit, all three make ideological
hints throughout their accounts.
69
Nevertheless this diference to Jones et al. (2007) another aspect I found in regard to Ida and Lis, is in line
with their results of examinations. According to those, the SEI silenced and suppressed narrations on more
operational aspects, as this could diminish the ideological reasoning. As argued, also Ida and Lis do so, thus
with reference to Jones et al. (2007) they make use of thematic suppression (p. 342). Following the arguments
in Jones et al. (2007) they could do so with the idea in mind that being occupied with more managerial and
organisational aspects could diminish the credibility of their construction as being caring about others.
I however did not fnd such a tendency in Alex’s account. Quite to the contrary, he uses internal and
operational aspects in order to certify his notion as being oriented towards sustainability and ecology.
Applying Jones et al.’s terminology he melds (p. 341) diferent narrations together by the way he crafs
himself and his activities. Tis fnding is particularly interesting when considering that the SEI in Jones et al.’s
(2007) study is not related to ecology, animal protection and sustainability, but as Ida and Lis, related to a
human and social sphere. Hence, the thesis adds to their work, that diferences in how SEIs speak about
themselves are not only dependent of the ideological degree embedded in their constructions, but also are in
dependence of the sphere the SEIs consider themselves to be operating in.
6.1.2. Functions of Other People
In relation to the second emphasis I describe how the SEIs narrate the functions of other people.
I show that the SEIs do not construct their doings as individual, but rather as collective activities. Tis
fnding confrms the ones of Parkinson and Howorth (2008), who found a similar tendency among British
SEIs.
Moreover, I illustrate that all three SEI craf other people as having had a functions in relation to their
activities. Ida considers other people as having had a function in the initial development and an infuence on
the collaboration with frms. Lis considers other people as a function in her becoming of what she is today
and for her motivations. Moreover, she also considers other people important, as she believes it difcult to
accomplish her activities on her own. Also in Alex narrations other people, especially friends and Alex’s
relational environment, have a function. He describes those in relation to the initial idea, funding,
development and collaborations and his learning, motivation, pleasure and pride. Moreover other people are
of importance to him, as they make it possible to avoid unpleasant contradictions.
As argued before, Alex constructs himself as less caring about other’s well-being than Ida and Lis. On the
other hand, Alex delineates other people’s function on himself as an SEI and his activities to a greater
magnitude than the other two. Based on this, it can be said that also he constructs his identity in relation to a
70
social orientation. Taking this into account, the fndings in regard to all three SEIs’ constructions support
Parkinson and Howorth (2008) when they highlight that SEIs construct themselves and their engagement
through and in relation to other people. Tis thesis however expands on their fndings by showing that the
manner in which SEIs construct themselves in relation to other people also is in dependence of the feld the
SEIs is operating in.
6.1.3. Difculties
In relation to the third emphasis I demonstrate that the SEIs’ narratives are marked by difculties.
Ida constructs herself by two diverging sub-identities, which she eventually integrates. Nevertheless this is
not an easy process. Her social orientation is repeatedly threatened by a stronger design-orientation, which at
times had lead to disruption in her course. Additionally she crafs contradictions between the pleasure of
others’ empowerment and the huge efort this implies. Moreover the fulflment of various desires is
complicated by fnancial limitations. She narrates such to indicate a necessity to compromise on the
achievable degree of change and empowerment, the employees’ remuneration and the inevitability to
collaborate with frms.
Lis constructs two similar sub-identities. Tough she does not craf them as integrated as Ida, but narrates
them as rather separated in contemplation of diferent activities. Tough, at times, she also aligns them in
relation to her Doll-activities. However, this is not to say that she does not narrate competing desires and
conficts between them. To the contrary, her design related desire to move the project to other places is
conficting with her social desire to create the largest possible impact. Beside this, her narratives revolve
around a complex net of simultaneous, but incompatible desires, resulting in the necessity to compromise.
Like Ida, Lis’ narratives circle around fnancial limitations, which in this case lead to strong doubts which she
is not able to resolve from her current narrative perspective.
Diferently, Alex constructs himself and his doings in a manner whereby he is able to integrate diverse
identities. While also he at times narrates conficts between these identities, he mainly does so in relation to
other requirements. Also in his case these are linked to fnancial limitations, which make compromise
necessary. Tough, even this necessity creates doubts to him. Furthermore, his narratives circle around the
contradiction between his creative desires and organisational and bureaucratic requirements. Such
requirements are in sharp contrast to his notion of himself and have led to disruptions in his course and lead
him to doubt future enterprises. Moreover, he crafs difculties as caused by others’ prejudices and wrong
assumptions. To Alex, all these aspects cause an ambiguity and constant negotiation with himself and the
environment. Tis for him implies fuidity and changes of his conceptualisation of himself and his activities.
71
Combining what I summarised so far, this thesis moreover resounds Jones et al.’s (2007) fndings. Tey argue
that SEIs face difculties due to the integration of entrepreneurial activities, with a focus on fnancial aspects,
and of socially and/or ecological concerned activities. However, this thesis extends on this, as it was shown,
that this integration is further complicated by other aspects of how the SEIs understand themselves. In the
specifc case of the thesis, the prominent aspect was represented by their notion of being designers and
creative.
However, the integration of diferent sub-identities and desires is not impossible for Ida, Lis and Alex. On
the contrary, as documented, they are able to integrate or at least align those at times, throughout their
accounts. Te fndings therefore also point in a direction as formulated by Strauch (2012). He argues that
being an SEI serves the individuals as a function or category by which they can integrate divergent identities.
Tis seems to apply fully only to Alex, as he is the only one who directly labels himself as an SEI.
Nevertheless, indirectly it applies to the other two as well. Indeed, at times they also use SE, in order to create
their own conceptualisations, namely an empowering designer for Ida and social value co-creation for Lis.
Tese conceptualisations serve them as category by which they integrate or align their at times divergent
sub-identities.
In extension to this, the thesis also supports another of Parkinson and Howorth’s (2008) points. I outlined
that the SEI’s construction processes are in a constant fux and based on an ongoing meaning creation in
regard to the diferent identity claims and positionings and in regard to the diverse difculties the SEIs are
narrating. Tis can be summarised by referring to Parkinson and Howorth (2008), when they say that SEIs
through their narratives re-write and re-construct, in an ongoing process, what they understand as SE and
being an SEI.
Trough the analytical attention on difculties, I also described how all three balance these with more
positive narratives. Ida does so through the repetitive use of the positive loaded “favela" metaphor. Alex does
so by his references to the undergone changes and the processual improvements. Furthermore, all three claim
themselves as active and as attempting to fnd solutions. Moreover, both Ida and Alex repeatedly narrate
optimistic outlooks for the future. Only in Lis’ account I did not fnd such a future orientation, whereby her
outlined doubts regarding her doings appear even stronger.
72
6.1.4. Happenstances
In relation to the last emphasis I describe how happenstances as coincidence, luck and the right circumstance
are components of the three SEIs’ narratives. I found that the three consider such as having infuenced their
initial ideas, the ongoing development and but also changes of their activities. Moreover, all three narratives
about themselves having become SEIs are stories of an accidental self-discovery, not of deliberated search.
Tough, in comparison, Ida does craf a stronger deliberation. However all three do not conceive those
happenstances as only sheer chance, but also as having come about due their own abilities and activities.
Based on prior discussions and conclusions, the thesis also supports Dey and Steyaert (2010a). Like them, I
found and described that the SEIs’ narratives are traversed by "paradoxes, complexities, dilemmas and
struggles" (Dey, 2010, p. 30). Moreover, the thesis is also in line with both Frogget and Chamberlayne (2007)
and Strauch (2012). Like them, I found the SEIs’ narratives to be driven by evolution and coincidence,
disruption and failure, dependency and by human caring. However, simultaneously the thesis’ SEIs construct
themselves as being active and able to fnd solutions. Moreover, Ida and Alex accentuate themselves as
having a will to drive things forward and as having visions for the future. In respect to Frogget and
Chamberlayne (2007) it can therefore be contended that the SEIs notion of themselves simultaneously are
crafed around two diferent story lines. Te second of those is composed of elements, which according to
Frogget and Chamberlayne can be associated with the classic hero fairy-tale (2007). Tough, divergent from
this story line and hence from their fndings, Ida, Lis and Alex do not craf themselves as being extraordinary,
nor as having individually and miraculously developed their activities and initiatives out of almost nothing.
Tis ascertainment rather echoes Strauch (2012) than Frogget and Chamberlayne (2007), who also argues
that such narrations are less frequent among SEIs.
Afer having discussed and concluded on the four emphases I now summaries on this so to answer the main
question the thesis is driven by.
6.2. "Social Entrepreneurs’" Narrative Constructions of Temselves
With this thesis I intended to add insights to the knowledge about the SEI by an exploration and description
of how three German SEIs narratively construct themselves. Tat said, I ofer supplementing, multiplying
and nuanced understandings on SEIs by my conclusions. Tough, due to the interest in how these
73
individuals narrate themselves, I do not present propositions of general statements on the SEI. Te
conclusions made are based on the particular interview situation with the specifc individual only. Moreover,
they are resting on my interpretations solely and I make no claims for them to be defnitive and authoritative
readings. However, the conclusions are made reasonable and substantiated, as they rest on a dialogical
process of moving back and forth between similar previous research, the interview accounts and inspiration
from the feld of narrative identity research, in particular from Mishler’s study on crafartist (1999).
Trough the thesis I argued that the overall interest in how SEIs narratively construct themselves is best
approached by four emphases. Due to my investigation of the frst emphasis I show how the SEIs construct
themselves through identity claims by which they particularise and defne themselves. Moreover, they narrate
themselves through positionings by which they specify what they consider to be part of and what not. Within
the specifc set of the thesis I found that the three SEIs construct themselves by identity claims and
positionings in relation and disrelation to being artistic, designers and creative. Furthermore I found that
they create notions of themselves in relation and disrelation to both SE, other SEIs, other SE-initiatives but
also to NGOs. Moreover, I showed that the SEIs construct themselves in relation and disrelation to
entrepreneurial, business, market and proft-oriented activities. Finally, I point out that they craf themselves
in contemplation of being caring and empowering others and in relation to sustainability, ecology and
animal protection. As part of this examination I also exhibited that the SEIs’ constructions of themselves are
ambiguous and fuxional in regard to all of these themes.
Based on my investigation of the second emphasis, I explain how all three SEIs craf themselves and their
doings through and in relation to other people. Tis comprises the constructions of themselves as being
caring about others, but also on how the SEIs narrate their activities as collaborative. Moreover it builds on
how they depict the functions of other people in regard to their notion of having become, proceeded and
developed what they are and what they are doing.
Grounded in my fndings of both the frst and the second emphasis, I argue further that all three construct
themselves in contemplation of a stewardship functions based on caring, though with diference in regard of
a social, environmental and an animal stewarding.
By my investigations of the third emphasis I found that the SEIs narrations of themselves and their doings
are traversed by difculties. I showed that their diverse identities - as constructed through their identity
claims and positions in relation to the outlined themes - are characterised at times by contradicting desires.
Furthermore I found that the SEIs’ notions of themselves and their doings are denoted by other competing
requirements, especially caused by fnancial limitations, all together implying the need to compromise and
doubts. Moreover, they portray themselves and they development in relation to disruptions and changes.
74
Simultaneously the SEIs balance and handle their narrations on difculties through constructions of
themselves as active, able to fnd solutions and partially by positive outlooks on their future.
Trough the last emphasis, I describe how the SEIs depict their own becoming of an SEI and their
activities as evoked by happenstances such as coincidences, luck and the right circumstance. I illustrate that
none of the three narrates their own becoming as an SEI due to strong enforcement, but rather by accidental
self-discovery. Tough, I also found that they do not consider the development of themselves and their
activities as spawned by sheer chance only.
As explained above, I fnd the SEIs’ narrations are crafed around a collaborative comprehension of their
activities, full of difculties, as well as happenstances. Tis brought me to argue that the SEIs exhibit only a
slight tendency to construct themselves by elements associated with the classic "hero"-tale and that they do
not accentuate themselves as extraordinary individuals at all.
Nevertheless, the circumstance that the SEI have a relatively similar background, are settled in the same
region and in the same manner are identifed as SEIs by the same SE-support organisation and regardless of
the common themes and similar tendencies throughout their accounts, I found that they in comparison to
each other construct themselves very uniquely. I believe this to be infuenced by the SEIs diferences in regard
of a stronger social or a stronger ecological orientation. However, heterogeneity in their narratives can be
found also among the more socially-oriented SEIs.
75
7. Implications, Limitations and Future Research
Afer having treated the overall question extensively, I use this last chapter in order to pinpoint the
implications of the thesis and its limitations as suggestions for possible future research.
A frst implication of the thesis is related to three fndings; i) the SEIs have a collectivistic understandings of
their activities, ii) their narrations centre around difculties, iii) their notion of having become an SEI and of
their activities development as infuenced by coincidences and a dynamic process of evolution. Tese
outcomes contribute to the critiques on the individualistic, positive and heroic story about the SEI. Te risk
of the perpetual repetition of such an un-nuanced story is that it might limit whether SEIs and SE-initiatives
are recognised as such (Dey & Steyaert, 2012). Moreover, it might deter individuals from engaging in SEactivities in the frst place, as they might not identify themselves with such portrayals (Ibid.). Another peril is
that the focus on successful, individual activism creates expectations not easily carried by those engaged in
SE. Furthermore, such stories might limit that also difcult and challenging experiences are becoming public.
However, making possible that such experience can surface is important as these may be valuable for SEIs’
actions and ongoing motivation (Frogget & Chamberlayne, 2007).
On this ground, the thesis supports those researchers who argue that future investigations should engage
in the exploration of more adequate research approaches (Dey & Steyaert, 2012; Frogget & Chamberlayne,
2007; Parkinson & Howorth, 2008; Jones et al., 2007; Strauch, 2012). With the aim to generate more nuanced
understandings of the SEI and in turn SE, so that they can fully unfold their ascribed potential towards social
change. One step in this direction is presented in this thesis by the use of a narrative approach. As explained,
such an approach does not bring about generalizable insights. However, its strength is that it ofers an avenue
to gain detailed comprehensions of those engaged in SE with an attention to difuse, complex, interpretive,
temporal aspect in the individuals’ meaning makings and construction processes (Rhodes & Brown, 2005).
On that note, the insights that are generated by this thesis can be expanded in manifold ways. First of all,
this could be done by taking into considerations and counteract the discussed limitations of the
methodology; future research could make use of observational methods, focus interviews and repeated
interviews, so to get a greater sense of SEIs’ meaning makings in diferent contexts.
Second, the thesis pointed out a diference in whether the SEI has a rather social or an ecological
orientation. Research on SE commenced to acknowledge this diference (Hockerts, 2006b), while narrative
76
investigations on this matter are so far limited. Furthermore, the thesis SEIs all have a background in design,
which is why it could be of value to explore the identity construction processes of SEIs with other educational
backgrounds. Additionally, all three SEIs’ initiatives are founded within the last fve years, so it could be of
interest to repeat similar investigations with SEIs whose initiatives have existed for a longer period.
Tird, this thesis makes use of concepts and vocabulary found in Mishler’s study on crafartist (2009).
Tough, as outlined, the feld of narrative identity research ofers a host of other theories and assumptions,
the application of which could generate valuable other insights on how SEI make sense of themselves and
their doings.
Fourth, this thesis pointed out four emphases which are worth paying attention to. Future research could
engage in more focused investigations of how each of these matters in SEIs’ notions of themselves.
Fifh, narrative approaches are well suited when intending to be sensible to gender and cultural
diferences (Mishler, 2009; Riessman, 2008). I fnd this important to mention, as neither the previous
research, nor this thesis pays regard to such matters. Future investigations could therefore concentrate on
how such aspects are a part in the SEIs’ construction processes of themselves.
Sixth, another limitation of this thesis can be found in the breadth of the analysis. Future research should
take more into consideration the macro aspects that have been overlooked in favour of a more stringent
focus on the individual comprehension. Tis issue is ofen encountered in relation to critiques of narrative
analysis, as the focus on the individuals’ narrations defects attention from issues such as power and
oppression (Atkinson & Silvermann, 1997 in Mishler, 1999). In order to tackle this faw, the investigation of
micro narratives could be combined with those of macro narratives, as e.g. in the discourse analysis as
suggested by Fairclough (1997, in Parkinson & Howorth, 2008). It could be of value to investigate SEIs’
personal narratives in the light of narratives about SE and the SEI in the particular national and regional
setting. Exploring how SEIs are governed by, resist and modify macro narratives in their narrations of
themselves (Parkinson & Howorth, 2008).
Finally, this thesis focused on the SEIs. However, narrative approaches could also be useful to bring about
knowledge in other streams of research related to SE which are out of the scope of this thesis, as: i) idea, start
up, acquisition and utilization of resources, ii) constraining and enabling role of institutions, iii) impact
measurements.
While not having been the goal, this thesis also has relevance for the defnitional debate on SE and the SEI. I
showed that the three SEIs construct themselves in regard to many other aspects and themes besides
entrepreneurship, business and being proft-oriented. Tis is important to highlight as business and
77
managerially dominated discourse are getting a strong infuence on the way SE and the SEI are
conceptualised (Dey & Steyaert, 2012). Te problem of such focus on entrepreneurial aspects is that it could
be counterproductive regarding SEIs activities. It might overshadow the political, social and ecological nature
of SE-initiatives as well as the motivational orientation of SEIs (ibid.). As also found in this thesis, aspects
characterized by a social, sustainable and ecological orientation, together with attributes such as sensitivity,
moderateness and humbleness are at least equally important for the SEIs and their doings (Ibid.). Moreover,
the thesis has demonstrated that the SEIs in comparison to each other construct themselves in very diferent
manners, not only in regard to being either more socially or more ecologically oriented.
It is crucial to stress both aspects, since restrictive and un-nuanced conceptualisation of what SE or being
an SEI means, can cause drawbacks similar to those mentioned before. It could imply that individuals
become deterred from SE, as they cannot identify themselves with such unilateral images of the SEI.
Similarly, it could result in a lost occasion to recognize potential SEIs and SE initiatives as such, leading to the
peril of limited access and misallocation of resources, including all kinds of support infrastructure (Parkinson
& Howorth, 2008).
Based on these deliberations this thesis acknowledges and carries forward other researchers’ arguments.
Te argument that future investigations should be done with a widened understanding of SE and that the
defnitional debate of SE and the SEI, foremost should be lef out of focus so to avoid a pre-matured closing
of the feld. Tis is vital, so to ensure that no restrictions are put upon the positive social and ecological
change potential ascribed to SE and SEIs (Dey & Steyaert, 2012).
78
List of Literature
Andersen, I. (2010): Den skinbarlige virkelighed: om valg af samfundsvidenskabelige metoder.
Samfundslitteratur, København, 4. udg, 3. oplag
Atkinson, P. and Silverman, D. (1997): Kundera’s Immortality: Te interview society and the invention of the
self, Qualitative inquiry,3(3), 304-325.
Austin, J. E. (2006): Tree Avenues for Social Entrepreneurship Research (pp. 22-34), in Mair, J., Robinson, J.
and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Bamberg, M. (2012): Narrative Analysis, in APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology, Vol. 2,
American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.
Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. (1966): Te Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of
Knowledge, Anchor Books, Garden City, NY.
Bornstein, D. and Davis, S. (2010): Social entrepreneurship: what everyone needs to know, Oxford Univ. Press,
Oxford.
Bruner, J. (1987): Life as a Narrative, Social Research, 11-32.
Bruner, J. (1991): Narrative construction of Reality, Critical Inquiry, 1-21.
Butler, J. (1990): Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, New York.
Czarniawska, B. (1998): A narrative approach to organization studies, Sage Publications Ltd, United
Kingdom.
Czarniawska, B. (2004): Narratives in social science research, Sage Publications Ltd, United Kingdom.
79
Davies, B. and Harrè, R. (1990): Positioning: Te discursive production of selves, Journal for the Teory of
Social Behaviour, 20, 43−63.
De Fina, A. (2006): Discourse and identity, in De Fina, A., Schifrin, D., a n d Bamberg (2006), M. G.:
Discourse and identity (Vol. 23). Cambridge University Press.
Desa, G. (2010): Social Entrepreneurship: Snapshots of a Research Field in Emergence (pp. 6-31), in Mair, J.,
Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2010): Values and Opportunities in Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave
Macmillan, London.
Dey, P. (2007): On the name of social entrepreneurship: business school teaching, research, and development
aid. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Basel.
Dey, P. (2010): Te symbolic violence of 'social entrepreneurship': Language, power and the question of the
social (subject), Te Tird Research Colloquium on Social Entrepreneurship (pp. 1-39).
Dey, P. and Steyart, C. (2010a): Te politics of narrating social entrepreneurship, Journal of Enterprising
Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy Vol. 4 No. 1, 2010 pp. 85-108.
Dey, P. and Steyart, C. (2010b): Nine Verbs to Keep the Social Entrepreneurship Research Agenda
‘Dangerous’, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 231-254.
Dey, P., and Steyart, C. (2012): Critical Refections on Social Entrepreneurship (pp. 255-273), in Volkmann,
C. K., Tokarski, K. O. and Ernst, K. (2012): Social Entrepreneurship and Social Business – An Introduction
and Discussion with Case Studies, Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Douglas, H. (2010): Divergent Orientations of Social Entrepreneurship Organizations (pp. 71-99), in Mair, J.,
Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2010): Values and Opportunities in Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave
Macmillan, London.
Fairclough, N. (1995): Critical Discourse Analysis: Te Critical Study of Language, Longman, London.
80
Froggett, L. and Chamberlayne, P. (2004): Narratives of social enterprise from biography to practice and
policy critique, Qualitative Social Work, 3(1), 61-77.
Gergen, K. (1997): Virkelighed og relationer. Dansk Psykologisk Forelag, København
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967): Te discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research (3rd ed.).
Aldine Transaction, United States of America
Gumperz, J. J. (1982): Language and social identity (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
Haraway, D. (1988): Situated knowledges: Te science question in feminism and the privilege of partial
perspective, Feminist studies, 14(3), 575–599.
Hermans, H. J., Kempen, H. J., and Van Loon, R. J. (1992): Te dialogical self: Beyond individualism and
rationalism, American psychologist, 47(1), 23.
Hermansen, M., Løw, O. and Petersen, V. (2004): Kommunikation og samarbejde-i professionelle relationer,
Alinea. København
Hernadi, P. (1987): Literary interpretation and the rhetoric of the human sciences (pp. 263-75), in Nelson, J.
S., Megill, A., & McCloskey, D. N. (Eds.). (1987).Te rhetoric of the human sciences: Language and argument
in scholarship and public afairs. Univerity of Wisconsin Press.
Hiles, D. and Cermak, I. (2007): Qualitative research: Transparency and narrative oriented inquiry. In X
European Congress of Psychology.
Holm Larsen, S. (2012): Socialkonstruktivisme som forskningsmetode (pp. 121-147), in i n Nygaard, C.
(2012): Samfundsvidenskabelige analysemetoder, Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg
Hockerts, K. (2006a): Entrepreneurial Opportunity in Social Purpose Business Ventures (pp. 142-155), in
Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London
81
Hockerts, K. (2006b): Ecopreneurship: Unique Research Field or Just ‘More of the Same’? (pp. 209-213), in
Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London
Humle, D. M. (2013): Fortællinger om arbejde. Copenhagen Business School, Institut for Organisation
Department of Organization.
Huybrechts, B. and Nicholls, A. (2012): Social Entrepreneurship: Defnitions, Drivers and Challenges (pp. 3159), in Volkmann, C. K., Tokarski, K. O. and Ernst, K. (2012): Social Entrepreneurship and Social Business –
An Introduction and Discussion with Case Studies, Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden
Hymes, D. (1967): Models of the interaction of language and social setting, Journal of Social Issues, 23(2), 828.
Josselson, R. (1996): Revising herself: Te story of women’s identity from college to midlife, Oxford University
Press.
Jones, R., Latham, J. and Betta, M. (2008): Narrative construction of the social entrepreneurial identity.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 14(5), 330-345.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962): Te structure of Scientifc Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago IL
Kvale, S. (2008): Doing interviews, Sage Publications Ltd, United Kingdom, London.
Langellier, K. M. (1999): Personal narrative, performance, performativity: Two or three things I know for
sure. Text and Performance Quarterly, 19(2), 125-144.
Lykes, M. B., and Mallona, A. (1997): Surfacing ourselves: Gringa, white-mestiza, brown, p.: 298-311 in Fine,
M. E., Weis, L. E., Powell, L. C., and Wong, L. (1997): Of white: Readings on race, power, and society, Taylor
& Frances/Routledge.
Mair, J. (2006): Exploring the Intentions and Opportunities Behind Social Entrepreneurship (pp. 87-95), in
Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London
82
Mair, J. and Mart•, I. (2004): Social Entrepreneurship: What Are We Talking about? A Framework for Future
Research. Barcelona: IESE, University of Navarra.
Mair, J. and Noboa, E. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship: How Intentions to Create a Social Venture are
Formed (pp. 121-137), in Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave
Macmillan, London
Mair, J. and Schoen, O. (2006): Successful social entrepreneurial business models in the context of developing
economies: An explorative study, International Journal of Emerging Markets 2 (1): 54-68.
Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London
Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2010): Values and Opportunities in Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave
Macmillan, London
McCall, G. (2003): Te Me and the Not-me: positive and negative poles of identity, (pp. 11-25), in Burke, P.,
Owens, T., Serpe, R. and Toits, P. (Eds): Advances in Identity Teory and Research, Kluwer, New York, NY,
Mishler, E. G. (1986): Te analysis of interview-narratives (pp. 233-255), in TR Sarbin (Ed.), Narrative
psychology: Te storied nature of human conduct, Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group.
Mishler, E. G. (1991): Research interviewing. Harvard University Press.
Mishler, E. G. (1999): Storylines: Crafartists’ narratives of identity, Harvard University Press.
Mitchell, M. C. and Egudo, M. (2003): A Review of Narrative Methodology, Systems Sciences Laboratory,
Australia
Nicholls, A. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship. New Models of Sustainable Social Change, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
83
Nicholls, A. and Cho, A.H. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship: Te Structuration of a Field (pp. 99-118), in
Nicholls, A. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship. New Models of Sustainable Change, Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Nygaard, C. (2012a): Introducktion til samfundsvidenskabelig analysemetoder (pp. 9-21), in Nygaard, C.
(2012): Samfundsvidenskabelige analysemetoder, Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg
Nygaard, C. (2012b): Kritisk realisem som paradigme for forskning I forretningsrelationer (pp. 49-75), in
Nygaard, C. (2012): Samfundsvidenskabelige analysemetoder, Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg
Parkinson, C. and Howorth, C. (2008): Te language of social entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development, 20(3), 285-309.
Parkinson, C. (2005): Meanings behind the language of social entrepreneurship, Working Paper, Institute for
Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development, Lancaster University Management School
Perrini, F. and Vurro, C. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship: Innovation and Social Change Across Teory and
Practice (pp. 57-87), in Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave
Macmillan, London
Perrini, F. and Vurro, C. (2010): Developing an Interactive Model of Social Entrepreneurship (pp. 165-181),
in Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2010): Values and Opportunities in Social Entrepreneurship,
Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995): Narrative confguration in qualitative analysis, International journal of
qualitative studies in education, 8(1), 5-23.
Presskorn-Tygesen, T. (2012): Samfundsvidenskabelige paradigmer – fre grundlæggende metodiske
tendenser I moderne samfundsvidenskab (pp. 21-47), in Nygaard, C. (2012): Samfundsvidenskabelige
analysemetoder, Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg
Rasmussen, E. S., Østergaard, P., & Beckmann, S. C. (2006): Essentials of social science research methodology,
84
Syddansk Universitetsforlag.
Riessman, C. K. (1993): Narrative analysis (Vol. 30), Sage Publications Ltd,
Riessman, C.K. (2000): Analysis of Personal Narratives, to appear in Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J. (2001).
Handbook of interview research: Context and method. S a ge P u b l i c at i o ns , f o u nd v i a
http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~brooks/storybiz/riessman.pdf, accessed 02.03.2015
Riessman, C. K. (2002): Illness narratives: Positioned identities, Wales, UK: Invited Annual Lecture Health
Communication Research Centre. Cardif University.
Riessman, C.K (2008): Narrative Methods for the Human Science, Sage Publications Ltd, United Kingdom,
London.
Rhodes, C. and Brown, A. D. (2005): Narrative, organizations and research, International Journal of
Management Reviews, 7(3), 167-188.
Robinson, J. (2006): Navigating Social and Institutional Barriers to Markets: How Social Entrepreneurs
Identify and Evaluate Opportunities (pp. 95-121), in Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social
Entrepreneurship, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Sarbin, T. R. (1986): Narrative psychology: Te storied nature of human conduct. Praeger
Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group.
Seelos, C., Ganly, K. and Mair, J. (2006): Social Entrepreneurs Directly Contribute to Global Development
Goals (pp. 253-276), i n Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K. (2006): Social Entrepreneurship, Palgrave
Macmillan, London
Schumpeter, J. (1934): Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper and Row, New York
Strauch, M. (2009): Selbst-Bilder von Social Entrepreneurs – Innenansichten eines Pha nomens in Henkel, M.
(Ed.). (2010): Social entrepreneurship-Status Quo 2009:(Selbst) Bild, Wirkung und Zukunfsverantwortung;
85
Tagungsband HUB Berlin, 16.-17. Juli 2009. Geozon Science Media.
Strauch, M. (2012): Social Entrepreneurship – Forschungsperspektiven, in Anheier, H. K., Schröer, A., &
Ten, V. (2012). Soziale Investitionen. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven, VS-Verlag ,Wiesbaden.
Tisted, L. N. (2003): Mangfoldighedens Dilemmaer,
Samfundslitteratur (PhD series: 2003-2024),
Copenhagen.
Volkmann, C. K., Tokarski, K. O. and Ernst, K. (2012): Background, Characteristics and Context of Social
Entrepreneurship (pp. 3-27), in Volkmann, C. K., Tokarski, K. O. and Ernst, K. (2012): Social
Entrepreneurship and Social Business – An Introduction and Discussion with Case Studies, Springer Gabler,
Wiesbaden
Weick, K. E. and R. E. Quinn (1999): Organizational change and development, Annual Review of Psychology,
Vol. 50, pp. 361-386.
Wenneberg, S. B. (2002): Socialkonstruktivisme som videnskabsteori - Sisyfos’ videnskab, working paper,
Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School
White, H. (1987): Te Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation, John Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore, MD
Yin, R. K. (2002): Case Study Research - Design and Methods, Sage Publications Ltd, United Kingdom,
London.
86