Social Entrepreneurs as Role Models for Innovative Professional Career Developments
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
After a careful reading of the study that you present, I would like to congratulate you on your work and tell you that there are some parts of the work that need substantial improvement.
Here are my suggestions:
1. In the introduction, the authors state that these organizations need to find a balance between being economically efficient, socially responsible and sustainable. Exploring this idea from the outset, even as a reinforcement of the problem under study, this difficulty in fulfilling the mission, seems to me to be central and should be further developed in the initial part of the literature review, where characteristics of entrepreneurship organizations are presented in a generic way. society and its actors. For example, the authors state that commercial activities have a place in social entrepreneurship, which must provide competitive services and products, but they do not state that excessive dependence on this activity can lead to deviations in the fulfillment of the mission of these institutions. I suggest:
- FROELICH, K.A. Diversification of Revenue Strategies: Evolving Resource Dependence in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28 (3), September, pp. 246-268, 1999.
- SWANSON, L.A.; ZHANG, D.D. The social entrepreneurship zone. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 22 (2), pp. 71–88, 2010.
2. The propositions, which we found later in the discussion of results, should be included in the follow-up to the literature review. Each one must have its own theoretical foundation, so the authors must make more efforts in this part of the work.
3. Additionally, the idea that organizations increasingly live in dynamic environments could be explored, albeit in a lighter way, that studies of the organizational strategy adaptation process have been emphasized as of fundamental importance by organizational theorists . In this perspective, the authors could reinforce the theoretical framework, linking the issue under study with the theory of resource dependence, which considers the environment as a source of influence in these organizations. Although the central idea of the study focuses on the social entrepreneur, the basic premise of this theory should not be overlooked, which is that decisions are taken within organizations, that is, within their internal political context, by the entrepreneur social, but that are related to the environmental conditions faced.
4. At the end of point 2. Authors must present the structure of the article that follows.
5. In point 3. It is necessary to have more data on the size of organizations, such as the area in which they work, the number of employees, seniority, the services they provide or products they sell, the target audience for which they are intended. , among others. Perhaps this information could be condensed into a table.
6. It was not clear whether the sample selection technique was by convenience, snowball technique, or another. As the 8 cases are presented, it is not possible to understand why these were the chosen cases and not any others.
7. In point 5. Discussion, refer: Based on the review of eight cases of social entrepreneurship, we develop a concept model…; in the abstract, they also mention a model, and in the conclusion, the same mention appears, but where is this model in the article?
Good luck.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
thank you very much for your comments, they have been very helpful for us in trying to improve our manuscript. We hope that we have complied with all your suggestions.
Best regards
The authors
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors address an interesting topic and raise the interesting question of what influences social entrepreneurs' decision to start their business. However, I find the link between the literature review and the aim of the paper very tenuous. Some of the dimensions/characteristics of social entrepreneurs are mentioned, but the literature review focuses on what social entrepreneurship is, rather than what the literature says about the key determinants of a decision-making process.
The paper also needs a thorough English proofreading. Some sentences are written vaguely and awkwardly (this is especially true for the translations of the interviewees' quotes). The conclusion should also be more concrete. In the conclusion, the authors repeat the statements/results from the previous chapter(s). The conclusion lacks the unique findings of this paper towards a discussion of the practical implications of the findings, limitations of the research/results, and implications for future research.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
thank you very much for your comments, they have been very helpful for us in trying to improve our manuscript. We hope that we have complied with all your suggestions.
Best regards
The authors
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
My suggestions were considered by the authors, who made a very important set of improvements to the article. I suggest it be accepted for publication. I appreciate the opportunity to review this article.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
thank you very much for all your comments that have helped us very much in substantially improving our manuscript.
Best regards
The authors
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
thank you for accepting and revising every comment. I found your work very interesting and ready to be published.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
thank you very much for all your comments that have helped us very much in substantially improving our manuscript.
Best regards
The authors
