The literature presented above presents ways of understanding the role of business in sustainability and the relationship between business and sustainability. However, this relationship has typically been studied in large companies; there has not been enough focus on micro and small firms, and empirical research has not produced enough evidence on how these smaller businesses can achieve social sustainability. There is also a lack of evidence, especially about the role of socially driven businesses and innovations, in achieving social sustainability. The reason for this ambiguity is due to the fact that earlier research examined the subject matter through a single research field and lacked a cross-disciplinary approach that could have provided a better understanding of this concept. In order to understand how socially driven businesses can contribute to social sustainability, these concepts need to be viewed as a whole, with literature on social sustainability on the one hand, and literature that fosters understanding of socially driven businesses, like social enterprises and sustainable businesses, and socially driven innovations, like social innovation and frugal innovation, on the other.
The motivation for bringing these concepts together into an overarching synthesis is that they are all concerned with sustainability and social issues. This leads us to consider the interrelations between these concepts and their characteristics; and in this case to understand them in the specific context of micro and small sized businesses. Figure 4 presents the basis of the literature surveyed in this context.
Figure 4: Literature regarding socially driven business and innovation
In terms of this dissertation, the social sustainability literature focuses on the maintenance and improvement of well-being for current and future generations. The social enterprise literature emphasises how a business could be established with a social purpose as a primary goal. A sustainable business perspective is used to illustrate the way a business should operate in order to achieve the broader goal of sustainable development. The theory of social innovation is used to understand the need for novel ideas and solutions that are more effective than current solutions in achieving a desired social change. The literature about frugal innovation helps explain how to do more with less by creating more business and social value while minimising the use of resources in a world conscious of sustainability demands. All these theoretical perspectives share a common sustainability viewpoint and attempt to move a step closer towards the larger goal of sustainable development.
3 Research Methodology
3.1
Research approachEpistemology and ontology serve as the foundations of research. Epistemology is concerned with what we can know about reality and how we can know it (Willis, 2007).
Epistemology concerns what is or should be regarded as acceptable knowledge in a discipline (Bryman, 2016; Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Ontology is concerned with the nature of reality (or being or existence). Ontology is about what can exist or what is real (Willis, 2007). According to Bryman (2016), ‘the central point of orientation is the question of whether social entities can and should be considered objective entities that have a reality external to social actors, or whether they can and should be considered social constructions built up from perceptions and actions of social actors. These two positions are referred to respectively as objectivism and constructionism. Objectivism is an ontological position that implies that social phenomena and their meanings have an existence that is independent of social actors. Constructionism is an ontological position that asserts that social phenomena and their meanings are continually being accomplished by social actors’. Epistemological and ontological assumptions strongly influence the way research is carried out (Bryman, 2016) and inform the theoretical perspective of the research (Crotty, 1998). The research philosophy that the researcher adopts contains these assumptions, which decide the research strategy and the methods (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).
According to Saunders et al. (2009), there are four main research philosophies in management research: positivism, realism, interpretivism, and pragmatism. Positivism assumes that application of the scientific method is the only way to discover truth about the world (Willis, 2007). Realism is related to positivism in that it also assumes a scientific approach to the development of knowledge; realism also assumes that an external reality is separate from our descriptions of it (Godfrey-Smith, 2003) but that it is interpreted through social conditioning (Saunders et al., 2009). Interpretivism assumes that reality is socially constructed, subjective and multiple (Saunders et al., 2009). It proposes that we abandon the search for generalisable truths and laws about human behaviour and concentrate on local understanding (Willis, 2007). Pragmatism is closely related to interpretivism. Pragmatists consider truth to be ‘what works’ (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998). Pragmatism is a practical approach, integrating and seeing compatibility between varied perspectives (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998; Saunders et al., 2009).
Another important element to be considered in scientific research is the selection of a research approach: deductive or inductive (Bryman, 2016). With deduction, a theory and hypothesis are developed and a research strategy is designed to test the hypothesis, whereas with induction, data is collected and a theory is developed as a result of the data analysis (Saunders et al., 2009). A third approach, called abductive reasoning, is seen as a way of combining deduction and induction. The abductive approach, commonly
referred to as ‘inference to the best explanation’, is reasoning from given data to a hypothesis that explains the data (Walton, 2005).
From a methodological point of view, a study can be categorised as either quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative and qualitative research differ in epistemology and ontology (Bryman, 2016). Quantitative research takes a deductive approach, is often associated with a positivistic perspective and is objectivist in its ontological position, whereas qualitative research takes an inductive approach, comes from interpretivist perspective and is constructionist in its ontological position (Bryman, 2016; Robson, 2002).
The nature of this study, with its focus on understanding the contribution of socially driven businesses and innovations to social sustainability, is consistent with the interpretivist approach. Interpretivism is often appropriate in business research, as business situations are highly complex and unique (Saunders et al., 2009). This study accepts that the empirical data collected is based on the values, presuppositions, ideas and experiences of the interviewees. Likewise, the researcher’s values are inherent in all phases of the research process.
This study can be seen as hermeneutic, in that it tries to understand a complex phenomenon as a whole from preconceptions about the meanings of its parts (Gadamer, 1976). It connects theories and cases together within the umbrella study and aims at creating a holistic understanding of the phenomenon using data within the case studies.
The understanding of the whole phenomenon was achieved through the individual cases and the understanding of each individual case was achieved through reference to the main phenomenon. The previously familiar elements in the chosen case studies created a supportive pre-understanding of the phenomenon in question that enabled the researcher to plan the study.
The research strategy chosen for this dissertation was qualitative case study, which implies an inductive approach and the generation of theories rather than their testing.
While the data used in the sub-studies was primarily qualitative, in Sub-study III both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed.
Figure 5 provides an overview of the research choices made by the researcher– research strategy, approach, philosophy, context, literature and data collection methods – and shows the overall research process. It illustrates how the series of choices, shown as tiny spheres, integrate to form the dissertation as a whole.
Figure 5: Research choices