Sustainability 12 09736 v2
Sustainability 12 09736 v2
Sustainability 12 09736 v2
Article
Social Entrepreneurship Education as an Innovation
Hub for Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem:
The Case of the KAIST Social Entrepreneurship
MBA Program
Moon Gyu Kim 1 , Ji-Hwan Lee 1 , Taewoo Roh 2 and Hosung Son 3, *
1 KAIST College of Business, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Hoegi-ro 85,
Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02455, Korea; controlme8@kaist.ac.kr (M.G.K.); jihwanlee@kaist.ac.kr (J.-H.L.)
2 Department of International Trade and Commerce, Soonchunhyang University, Unitopia 901,
Soonchunhyang-ro 22, Sinchang-myeon, Asan-si, Chungchungnam-do 31538, Korea; troh@sch.ac.kr
3 Korea Electronics Technology Institute, Saenari-ro 25, Bundang-gu, Seong-nam, Gyeong-gi 13509, Korea
* Correspondence: hsson79@keti.re.kr or hs_son@kaist.ac.kr; Tel.: +82-31-789-7761
Received: 30 September 2020; Accepted: 19 November 2020; Published: 22 November 2020
Abstract: As social problems become more extensive and diverse, one of the most critical capabilities
of social entrepreneurs is connecting and aligning various stakeholders. Social entrepreneurs can solve
problems better through collaboration with stakeholders, and this leads to sustainable innovation
of society. Accordingly, social entrepreneurship education (SEE) programs should be designed
and operated to cultivate social entrepreneurs’ abilities to enhance connectivity with all relevant
entities of the social enterprise ecosystem. Consequently, SEE can form ever-growing communities
of social entrepreneurs while functioning as innovation hubs for entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs)
evolving on their own. To this end, this study proposes a design and assessment framework for
SEE. The framework emphasizes strengthening internal connectivity among SEE program members
and external connectivity with outside entities, including universities, firms, government agencies,
civil societies, and natural environments. This framework clarifies how and to whom social
entrepreneurs should connect throughout the SEE process. This paper analyzes the case of an MBA
degree SEE program in Korea using this framework and identifies directions for further improvement
of SEE, contributing to the social entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education literatures by
integrating SEE’s key features with social theories of learning and the quintuple helix model for
sustainable innovation ecosystems. Practically, our findings provide a useful benchmark to find
isolated internal and external entities that need more active interactions to achieve SEE’s purposes.
1. Introduction
Social enterprises have been noteworthy as a key solution to a variety of social problems within
current market economy systems [1]. Although enterprises create economic and social value in the
market economy system, they also raise various social problems, such as inequality and environmental
pollution [2]. In response, discussions of corporate social responsibility have been widely held among
management scholars, and social enterprises that seek solutions to address such problems have attracted
considerable interest among policymakers, academics, and practitioners [3]. Social enterprises are
organizational entities that create both economic and social values by solving social problems through
business mechanisms [4–6]. They utilize the economic value that they create as a resource to solve
social problems and underpin sustainable development. Unlike traditional business organizations that
create social value by participating in social projects to complement the core objective of economic
value generation, social enterprises focus first on their social mission to create positive social impact
and measure the impact to communicate and collaborate with various stakeholders [6].
Social problems are spreading to a wide variety of areas, and the severity of each area is also
becoming greater [7]. The damage caused by social problems lies not at the level of certain persons or
a particular region but at the level of all humankind, and they threaten not only the convenience of
everyday life but also the survival of the planet. It is not possible to solve these diverse and severe
social problems through the endeavors of one special person, a certain organization, or even a single
country. Accordingly, the most critical factor in the success of social enterprises is the formation of
a consensus and collaboration with stakeholders in the social problems that they are trying to solve [8].
In this sense, one of the essential competencies of a social entrepreneur is the alliance-building
capability [9]. When nurturing future social entrepreneurs or educating incumbent social entrepreneurs,
all of the elements of the curriculum, all extracurricular activities, and all aspects of hardware/software
infrastructure design of education programs should be aligned to form an organic social network [10].
At the same time, the literature on social entrepreneurship education (SEE) has mostly discussed the
effects of SEE from a microscopic perspective and focused on whether an educated person is attempting
to start a social enterprise [11]. Discussions of what makes good SEE, how to maximize the effects
of SEE, and what happens after the establishment of a social enterprise still lack an ecosystem-wide
perspective. Considering all of the relevant entities of the social enterprise ecosystem enables us to
better examine how SEE can cultivate the problem-solving abilities of social entrepreneurs/enterprises,
which could ultimately lead to sustainable development of the ecosystem.
Given this background, this paper aims to propose a conceptual framework that can be used to
design, analyze, and evaluate SEE programs building upon such an integrative perspective. In order to
design this conceptual framework, this paper builds upon two theoretical bases from previous
studies: social theories of learning, which emphasize the importance of communities of practice,
and the quintuple helix model (QHM), which defines the components of a sustainable innovation
ecosystem and describes the process through which innovation occurs. According to this framework,
SEE should contribute to forming an organic and self-sustaining social enterprise ecosystem by
ensuring connectivity with other major entities that constitute the external environment in which
social problems arise. The traditional role of universities was a knowledge storehouse; this role
later evolved into a knowledge factory and, in turn, a knowledge hub [12]. In this study, we define
the role of SEE as a collaborative hub for the innovation network of social enterprise and startup
ecosystems. SEE is viewed as a promising education platform that fosters entrepreneurs who can
create business opportunities in the process of discovering and solving social problems and, thus,
underpins social sustainability.
In addition, this paper applies this new framework to the case of a SEE program in Korea to check
its usability and contribution. As a forefront attempt of SEE, the Social Entrepreneurship MBA Program
(KSEMP) of the College of Business at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)
is a full-time MBA program that provides active support, including full scholarships for two years,
to foster social entrepreneurs. It is a unique MBA program that requires all students to establish and
scale social enterprises to a certain level before graduation and thus aims to contribute directly to
the social enterprise ecosystem. The process and the results of KSEMP case analysis shows that the
framework is helpful in identifying future directions for further improvement of the program.
This study contributes to expanding the literature on the theoretical framework for the design
or evaluation of SEE. The goals and the corresponding roles of SEE can be viewed theoretically
from the overall perspective of the social enterprise ecosystem. This paper contributes to expanding
the literature on social entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship education, and SEE by integrating SEE’s
key features with social theories of learning and the QHM for sustainable innovation ecosystems.
In addition, the framework developed on this basis can be utilized by stakeholders in the government
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 3 of 23
and educational institutions that wish to design new SEE programs or improve existing SEE programs
through systematic assessment and analyses.
The above literature suggests that community building is methodologically important in SEE
to facilitate learning from collaboration and competition between students and that the growth of
individuals, as part of the educational performance of SEE, is linked to the sustainable development
of their society. At the same time, the literature has shown the need for research from a holistic
viewpoint that aligns the contents, methods, and performance of SEE. While previous studies of SEE
performance have discussed the impacts at the individual, organizational, and environmental levels,
most of the research on the contents and methods of SEE has focused on the individual level. However,
the contents and methods of education cannot be viewed separately from the purpose or performance
goal. Therefore, SEE researchers must seek alignment in content and methods that meets the purpose of
such education while maintaining the consistency of the individual, organizational, and environmental
levels of performance that SEE aims to achieve.
was proposed by Freeman [25] and consists of economic, social, political, and institutional factors
that affect the creation and diffusion of innovation. In particular, organizations that create and
commercialize knowledge play critical roles in the innovation system [26,27]. An innovation cluster
consists of groups of interconnected enterprises in a specific sector or industry with commonality
and complementarity, which have the advantage of being geographically adjacent to one another [28].
Engel and Del-Palacio [29] further developed this concept to suggest that clusters build a new framework
to support a global network among them, rather than existing like isolated islands. They referred
to Silicon Valley as a prime example, explaining that entrepreneurs and startups can enjoy benefits
from being located near professional institutions that spread best practices for entrepreneurs, such as
intellectual property (IP) brokerage companies and venture capital firms. A knowledge ecosystem is
an expertise-intensive industry cluster that covers a variety of organizational forms, such as shared
values, anchor tenants, and cross-network alignments [30]. In particular, being located close to where
knowledge is created decreases the cost of movement of human resources and intangible resources,
such as information and ideas. It also promotes the recreation of knowledge that comes from collective
knowledge [31,32]. Consequently, participants create and diffuse innovation more rapidly through
collective learning [33]. These concepts all claim that enabling more interaction between components
through structuring networks and strengthening connectivity can promote the operation and expansion
of systems, clusters, and ecosystems.
An EE is an economic community that supports interaction between businesses or individuals,
develops their capabilities and roles over time, and aligns itself with the direction set by key
companies [34]. However, the EE is not under the control of individual leaders or organizations [35].
Although some organizations might have a greater influence on the EE than others, no organization
dominantly controls or governs the EE or its components. In addition, interactions in the EE consist of
collaborations and competitions, and the formation of a value network enables the creation of value that
a single company cannot create alone [36]. In particular, socio-cultural characteristics create a strong
sense of community and implicit rules in the formation of value networks among the constituents
of the EE [37,38]. The components of an EE are diverse and complex and include entrepreneurs,
investors, mentors, and other resource providers. Moreover, the relationships among the components
are dynamic [38].
Universities contribute to the creation and growth of EEs by supporting the establishment of
spin-offs or startups through knowledge transfer mechanisms [39]. In particular, in addition to education
and research, entrepreneurial universities play a role in promoting the production, diffusion, absorption,
and utilization of novel knowledge in surrounding areas by intensively supporting the entrepreneurial
activities of researchers and students with close links to research and development (R&D) centers,
private companies, science and technology complexes, and government agencies [40,41]. In addition,
well-organized entrepreneurial university ecosystems lead to successful business ecosystems [30].
The business ecosystem is naturally built around entrepreneurial universities, since companies utilize
innovative ideas and a high level of human resources [42,43] and governments invest in innovative
startup companies to grow regional economies [44].
The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship assumes that knowledge creation is a driving
force of innovation and economic growth. New knowledge can be formed by reorganizing existing
knowledge, which is related to the ability of members to find, obtain, absorb, share, and use knowledge
effectively and efficiently [45]. Hence, entrepreneurship is a critical means of spreading new knowledge
that ultimately leads to economic growth [46,47]. In explaining the processes of knowledge creation,
transfer, absorption, and application, social networks are also instrumental [48]. In this respect,
universities, as the key constituents of the EE, can play the role of innovation hubs in an EE and expand
the EE by promoting information and knowledge exchange beyond interactions within a specific
regional context [12].
The EE concept discussed thus far indicates the orientation of the network of social entrepreneurs
or the social enterprise ecosystem. The concept is further reinforced from the perspective of social
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 6 of 23
entrepreneurship, in which the formation of an ecosystem that connects various entities of society and
the natural environment to communities of entrepreneurs and groups of interconnected enterprises
creates continuous innovation. Social entrepreneurs need a broader range of stakeholder collaboration
compared to ordinary entrepreneurs, who seek unmet consumer needs and recognize them as
opportunities, because social entrepreneurs also aim to address the unmet needs of local communities
or society [49–51].
By synthesizing the theoretical considerations above, we can present and investigate the
connectivity of SEE from two angles.
Internal Connectivity of SEE. From the SEE methodological perspective, building a community of
social entrepreneurs that facilitates learning from collaboration and competition among students will
contribute to their performance. In addition, the personal performance generated through SEE will
lead to the sustainable development of society.
External Connectivity of SEE. The core of an EE is connectivity, which promotes interactions,
usually in the form of cooperation and competition among different entities. The SEE of universities,
a source of new knowledge creation, can serve as an innovation hub for an EE, being organized by
close connections among members of society and enabling the EE to create additional value that each
entity cannot create separately [36]. In addition, the value creation capability of the EE continuously
grows and evolves.
The link between entrepreneurial universities and business ecosystems is a meaningful research
topic that scholars have recently noted [30,52]. Previous studies have made great progress in identifying
the individual components of EEs and exploring the connections between them. However, there remains
a lack of research on how the SEE of universities, as an innovation hub, interacts with other components
to form and develop an EE from a holistic perspective. Shedding light on the role of SEE and analyzing
it from the EE perspective will help us to synthesize scattered fragmentary studies and increase
understanding of SEE from a holistic perspective.
1. Conceptual
Figure 1.
Figure Conceptualframework for social
framework entrepreneurship
for social educationeducation
entrepreneurship design fromdesign
the entrepreneurial
from the
ecosystem perspective.
entrepreneurial ecosystem perspective.
3. The Case: KAIST Social Entrepreneurship MBA Program (KSEMP)
3. The Case: KAIST Social Entrepreneurship MBA Program (KSEMP)
This paper is largely based on an in-depth case study of a unique higher education program,
This paper is largely based on an in-depth case study of a unique higher education program,
fully dedicated to teaching and nurturing current and future entrepreneurs who endeavor to solve
fully dedicated to teaching and nurturing current and future entrepreneurs who endeavor to solve
social problems by establishing for-profit, impact startups. KSEMP is an independent, two-year
social problems by establishing for-profit, impact startups. KSEMP is an independent, two-year full-
full-time MBA program within KAIST College of Business in Seoul, Korea.
time MBA program within KAIST College of Business in Seoul, Korea.
3.1. Data Collection
3.1. Data Collection
Our case study is based on three types of data, which are complementary to each other
andOur case objectivity
ensure study is based on three
to some typesFirst,
extent. of data, which
official are complementary
online to each other
and offline promotional and
materials
ensure objectivity to some extent. First, official online and offline promotional
provided basic information about the program. Official brochures and websites of KSEMP and materials provided
basic informationorganizations,
its upper-level about the program.
KAISTOfficial brochures
(as a whole and websites
university) and itsof KSEMP
College ofand its upper-level
Business, as well as
organizations, KAIST (as aorganizations
those of start-up-related whole university)
withinand its College
KAIST includingof Business,
SK Centreasfor
well as those
Social of start -up-
Entrepreneurship,
related
Startuporganizations
KAIST, and within KAIST
K-School, wereincluding
thoroughly SK Centre
examined. for Social Entrepreneurship,
Second, Startup
internal operational KAIST,
information
and K-School, were thoroughly examined. Second, internal operational information
was used for deeper observation. As faculty members of KAIST, two of the authors are deeply involved was used for
deeper observation.
in the program and As faculty
have direct members of KAIST,
access to the two of the
official minutes authors are
of biweekly KSEMPdeeply involvedmeetings
operational in the
program and have direct access to the official minutes of biweekly KSEMP operational
and monthly media exposure newsletters from July 2018 to June 2019. Third, interviews and survey meetings and
monthly media exposure
results collected newsletters
as part of a 15-weekfrom Julyin2018
project 2018totoJune 2019. Third,
formulate interviews
the future direction andof survey
KSEMP,
results collected as part of a 15-week project in 2018 to formulate the future direction of KSEMP,
assisted by a globally renowned consultancy, were used. Table 2 provides an overview of the three
types of data.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 8 of 23
assisted by a globally renowned consultancy, were used. Table 2 provides an overview of the three
types of data.
Sources Description
Based on the following public information describing the KSEMP,
the authors described what activities for internal/external connectivity
the KSEMP has performed and with whom.
• Official brochures
Public promotion materials * • Official websites of upper-level organizations (KAIST and KAIST
College of Business)
• Official websites of start-up-related organizations in KAIST (SK
Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, KAIST College of Business
Start-up, Start-up KAIST, and KAIST K-School)
- Eight professors
Dean, College of Business (1)
Director, Social Entrepreneurship MBA (1)
Director, Institute for Start-up KAIST (1)
Others (5)
- Five alumni
Social enterprise CEO (3)
Interviews ** and surveys Social enterprise employee (1)
Social enterprise researcher (1)
- Three related field experts
Venture capital firm CEO (1)
Impact accelerator CEO (2)
- Six members of the anchor firm
Chairman (1)
C-level manager (2)
Executive director (2)
Project leader (1)
- 28 alumni
- 32 students
Notes: * The website addresses of public promotion materials are shown in Appendix A. ** More details of the
interviews are provided in Appendix A.
the country. Compared to the new goal, i.e., to “build an ecosystem where social enterprises can grow
for themselves”, which the Korean government set as the 3rd Basic Plan for Social Enterprise Promotion
in 2018, KAIST and the SK Group started to prepare for the future much earlier. In 2012, the KAIST
College of Business and the SK Group signed the first memorandum of understanding (MOU),
drawing a blueprint for the actual collaboration, and the SK Group invested KRW 9 billion (As of
September 2020, KRW 1000 equals approximately USD 0.8) for curriculum design, faculty recruitment,
and operating systems. In 2016, they signed the second MOU for another five years, with the SK Group
investing KRW 12.5 billion to optimize the operation and to improve the performance of KSEMP by
2021. Approximately 45% of the total budget is used for scholarships.
According to its official brochure (https://www.business.kaist.ac.kr), KSEMP is “a platform training
next-generation entrepreneurs to create innovative values through compassion and enthusiasm toward
people and society”, and its educational focus is on expanding the practical management capability of
potential social entrepreneurs. KSEMP students must develop competitive and sustainable business
models for their social enterprises and use these models to establish and manage a company successfully
during this two-year full-time degree program. As an MBA course, KSEMP nurtures the following
types of students as social entrepreneurs: (1) those who have expertise in technology, culture, art,
and social issues but lack management knowledge and experience; and (2) those who need experience
and mindset as entrepreneurs even if they have basic knowledge about business administration.
The program’s curriculum mainly consists of classes related to starting a social enterprise.
These classes are different from the classes in academic master programs or general MBA programs,
which focus primarily on research abilities for future business scholars or administrative and operational
abilities for professional managers. KSEMP classes are designed to equip students to become social
entrepreneurs with an appropriate understanding of and attitude toward social problems and to
expand their competencies and qualifications to launch and run a startup that pursues rapid financial
growth while solving social problems. Table 3 shows the composition and major subjects of the
curriculum. While offering fundamental business management and social entrepreneurship classes
as mandatory for the students who have diverse experiences as engineers, experts in non-profit
organization, designers, artists, and so on, KSEMP offers more specialized courses for those who want
to learn more about technology and specific social issues by collaboration with other MBA programs
and engineering colleges.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Figure
Figure 3. Categories
3. Categories of social
of social enterprises
enterprises founded
founded by KSEMP
by KSEMP alumni.
alumni.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 11 of 23
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 23
Figure 4.
Figure Sales distribution
4. Sales of Korean
distribution of Korean social
social enterprises
enterprises in
in 2012
2012 and
and 2017.
2017. Source:
Source: MEL, The Third
MEL, The Third
Basic Plan for Social Enterprise Promotion (2018–2022), 2018.
Basic Plan for Social Enterprise Promotion (2018–2022), 2018.
However, short-term
However, short-term quantitative growth might
quantitative growth might be
be the
the culmination
culmination of of social
social enterprise
enterprise growth
growth
due to strong government support, and such support could not lead to the
due to strong government support, and such support could not lead to the long-term sustainable long-term sustainable
growth ofofthe
growth whole
the ecosystem
whole [56]. The
ecosystem [56].Third
The Basic
ThirdPlan for Social
Basic Plan Enterprise
for SocialPromotion
Enterprisedemonstrates
Promotion
the limitations of past growth in many ways. Considering
demonstrates the limitations of past growth in many ways. Considering thatthat the sales of social
the enterprises
sales of socialare
mainly from purchases by public agencies, the general awareness of social enterprises
enterprises are mainly from purchases by public agencies, the general awareness of social enterprises remained
very low. very
remained Above all,Above
low. the inflow of human
all, the inflow ofresources
human was not sufficient,
resources was not and advanced
sufficient, and education
advanced
and training programs for developing various types of expertise of existing
education and training programs for developing various types of expertise of existing human human resources were
not ready were
resources [56]. not
As aready
result, most
[56]. Associal enterprises
a result, most socialwere classifiedwere
enterprises intoclassified
the job offering
into thetype (67.2%),
job offering
and other types—social services (6.0%), local community aid (5.7%), hybrid
type (67.2%), and other types—social services (6.0%), local community aid (5.7%), hybrid (9.1%), (9.1%), and others
and
(12.0%)—were very limited [56]. While a variety of social issues, such as fine
others (12.0%)—were very limited [56]. While a variety of social issues, such as fine dust, mental dust, mental illness,
climate climate
illness, change,change,
plastic waste,
plastic marine
waste, pollution, population
marine pollution, aging, displaced
population persons,persons,
aging, displaced and gender and
equality, are becoming more serious in terms of the depth and extent of their influence,
gender equality, are becoming more serious in terms of the depth and extent of their influence, and new issues
and
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 12 of 23
arise in succession rapidly, the expertise of social entrepreneurs, who represent an alternative to these
problems, falls short of expectations.
The Korean government recognized these limitations and set a new goal, i.e., to “build an ecosystem
where social enterprises can grow for themselves”, in new plans for social enterprise support [56].
The new goal promotes continuous inflow of new human resources and material resources and
expands the connectivity among all of the constituent entities to build an ecosystem in which social
enterprises, as the main entity of the ecosystem, can achieve sustainable growth through competition
and collaboration. Specifically, the government has a plan to raise an impact fund of as much as
KRW 100 billion to invest in social enterprises; to expand the contact points between customers and
social enterprises by offering opportunities to launch, work for, and purchase from social enterprises;
to encourage collaboration between social enterprises and other social enterprises or large corporations;
and to establish an integrated database and platform for seamless information sharing between any
entities belonging to the ecosystem [56].
In addition, such an official and regular workshop gives students an opportunity to objectify their
business based on advice from multiple experts in various fields.
The Startup Weekend. All of the members of KSEMP, including faculty and staff members,
participate in a retreat consisting of special lectures, reciprocal advisory sessions, and recreational
programs. Its foremost goal is to strengthen the sense of belonging to the community and to promote
partnerships between students. This intensive gathering lasted for one night and two days in the
spring semester and for a whole day in the fall semester during our data collection period.
Incubating center. If a student receives a level 5 or higher assessment through the business model
development workshop mentioned above, she can move into a shared office or the incubating center
with her startup teammates. All KSEMP students are founders of their own startups; they build their
teams while developing business models and require a physical space to work together. Since the
incubating center holds an irregular seminar to share the know-how of the tenant startups, not only
the entrepreneurs, but also their teammates form a larger community to share information, knowledge,
and experiences.
Overseas experiential learning trip. This program is also fully sponsored by the SK Group and
takes place in the first summer semester. Students gain the field experiences needed to start a social
enterprise and related knowledge, and their social entrepreneurship and global competence are
strengthened through the projects that they design themselves. Over one or two weeks spent overseas
(e.g. the UK, the US, and Latin America), participants form a stronger network while sharing each
other’s concerns and evoking their identities as social entrepreneurs.
Club activities. As a member of KAIST College of Business, students can participate in a variety
of club activities related to technology, sports, music, and religion. They can also choose clubs
closely related to their business-related interests, such as strategy, marketing, finance, and media
communications. Club activities allow students to broaden their understanding of other members of
the community by thinking and talking about topics other than the official curriculum.
the online platform, frequent communication is conducted through websites that support class
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 14 of 23
management and various formal and informal social network services.
50% 36%
30% 26%
30% 20% 18%
10%
-10%
Others
4.2.1. University
KAIST. As part of Vision 2031, “A Global Value-creating Leading University”, KAIST, Asia’s leading
educational institution, aims to cultivate future leaders who create social value. The university is
expanding its educational mission for scientists and engineers regarding social value and ethics based
on the entrepreneurial university model established for itself, and KSEMP is at the heart of such
efforts. In addition to KSEMP, KAIST endeavors to create social value through engineering technology,
running entrepreneurship education and research programs, such as the K-School, the Institute of
Startup KAIST, and the KAIST Centre for Science-based Entrepreneurship. It also cultivates students’
abilities to define and solve problems based on social value and mutual collaboration using the
pedagogy of Education 4.0 through classes such as Social Capstone Design, Social Problem Solution
Competition, Startup Competition, and Appropriate Technology Projects. This explicit vision set
by the university headquarters facilitates the collaboration of many sub-organizations and provides
a consistent educational philosophy for various education and research programs.
KAIST College of Business.KAIST College of Business has designed various master’s degree
programs with courses that nurture entrepreneurs, entrepreneurial managers, and an entrepreneur-friendly
environment. KSEMP is a unique MBA program launched in 2013 for social entrepreneurs who want
to start social enterprises. In 2019, KAIST College of Business also established the Entrepreneurship
and New Business Development Track and the Centre for KAIST College of Business Startup, and it
operates an entrepreneurship minor program. The experiences and infrastructure of KSEMP have
contributed to these new efforts and created a synergistic effect with them, for example, bringing talent
from various backgrounds into social enterprises built by KSEMP students. Furthermore, KSEMP plans
to construct a new online platform that will promote collaboration not only with the College of Business,
but also with many other colleges in KAIST and create startup teams consisting of students from
various majors. This new platform is expected to help overcome the geographical separation of the
College of Business at the Seoul campus from the colleges of technology and engineering located at the
main Daejeon campus. KSEMP is never an entirely stand-alone program and provides students with
opportunities to take courses and meet students in MSc or MA programs in KAIST and its College
of Business.
Alumni network. KAIST has an enormous and strong alumni network in Korea and overseas.
In particular, KAIST College of Business has a special alumni network mainly for entrepreneurs and
investors. This network sponsors business plan competitions and voluntarily serves as a mentor group
for students to establish their own startups. More importantly, the members of this network invest in
the companies that KAIST students create or offer business opportunities to them. Of KSEMP alumni,
80.3% showed clear intention to take advantage of the alumni network, according to our survey.
Research network. KSEMP shares industry trends and research on the social enterprise ecosystem
with professors at KAIST and various social enterprise experts through regular scholarly forums.
KSEMP uses this forum to continuously seek future directions and to forge paths forward. For example,
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 16 of 23
KSEMP hosted the Korean Society of Strategic Management 2019 fall conference, the theme of which
was “Growth Strategy for Social Ventures”. Also sponsored by SK’s Happynarae, the conference
was an impactful opportunity to introduce KSEMP to a number of researchers and practitioners,
and it laid the foundation for cooperation among universities and corporations to form a social
enterprise ecosystem.
Global network. KSEMP collaborates with various global organizations other than Korean
universities for SEE. The overseas experiential learning trip and KSEMP alumni targeting foreign
markets have played important roles in building bridges between the program and global institutions.
For example, collaboration with the Vietnam Social Enterprise Alliance, which visited KAIST College
of Business in February 2019, led to the actual output of global networking. KSEMP was able to
introduce its practice, as well as the social entrepreneurs, to the official delegation from Ho Chi
Minh City University of Technology, Vietnam National University Hanoi, and Tra Vinh University.
KSEMP and the Vietnamese visitors discussed KSEMP-born startups’ entry into the Vietnamese
market and immediately created an MOU between a specific social enterprise and Tra Vinh Vocational
College. Based on this MOU, the company established the first social enterprise in Tra Vinh that
would contribute to vocational education and job creation for college students in the region by running
an internship program.
4.2.2. Government
Government support. The government plays a crucial role as a funding source for various support
projects in the Korean social enterprise ecosystem, and it runs many intermediate organizations to grow
the ecosystem. The Korea Social Enterprise Promotion Agency (KoSEA) is a representative organization
that runs various support projects. KoSEA officially certifies the governmental qualifications of social
enterprises, and only certified enterprises can apply for certain projects. For the 12 months from
July 2018 to June 2019 that our data sources cover, KSEMP students were involved in many support
projects of KoSEA, Korea Arts Management Service, Korea Creative Content Agency, National Health
Insurance Service, the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, and so on. The Seoul Business Agency
under the Seoul Metropolitan Government directly invested in the company of a KSEMP student,
which creates jobs for elderly individuals. Many other government organizations, including Seoul
Food Startup Center, have also provided KSEMP students with free offices and various shared services.
Government partnership. There are a variety of collaboration cases between KSEMP students
and government organizations. KAIST and the Seoul Metropolitan Government collaborated to
build Yangjae Innovation Hub in southern Seoul. KSEMP also holds and participates in a forum
with government organizations, such as KoSEA and the Gyeonggi Provincial Government, to raise
awareness about social enterprises.
Government organizations positively utilize collaboration with KSEMP-born social enterprises
to achieve their own goals. The Korea Sports Promotion Foundation operates a sports program to
build and strengthen local communities against prejudice toward multicultural families with a sports
education startup of a KSEMP alumnus. Through collaboration with KSEMP enterprises, the Seoul
Metropolitan Government has created jobs for the younger generation in the resource recirculation
industry, and the Namwon City Government has operated a pilot project to help middle-aged workers
switch their careers after early retirement. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of
Education operate a program that promotes cultural exchanges to enhance Korea’s national image
with a KSEMP company.
Followed by growing attention to KSEMP, the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA)
began to sponsor a new master’s degree program within KSEMP in 2019, specializing in the social
economy for highly qualified foreign students from developing countries. Moreover, the Busan City
Government suggested launching a branch campus in Busan.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 17 of 23
4.2.3. Industry
Anchor firm. The co-founder of KSEMP, the SK Group, is one of the largest conglomerates in
Korea, and it plays an important role, serving as an anchor firm for KSEMP by connecting its tangible
and intangible assets to the research and education of KAIST. Happynarae is the first social enterprise
among the affiliates of the SK Group. In 2019, Happynarae’s annual turnover was approximately
KRW 1.1 trillion, and the total ordinary profit given back to society amounted to approximately KRW
17 billion. It is the largest financial sponsor of KSEMP and supports human resources for operating the
overall program. The Centre for Social Value Enhancement Studies runs an incentive program called
“Social Progress Credit”, which helps many KSEMP enterprises, as well as other social enterprises,
to measure their social impact in terms of monetary value. Happynarae rewards social enterprises
with cash for the social impact that they create. The Happiness Foundation of the SK Group supports
research projects on social enterprises and raises awareness about social enterprises through media and
public relations. Numerous affiliates of the SK Group, such as SK Chemical, SK Energy, SK Innovation,
SK Magic, SK Network, and SK Telecom, have been attempting to create synergy by sharing their
existing infrastructures, experiences, and capabilities with KSEMP startups that have innovative
business solutions with social impact. KSEMP students chose the brand power of KAIST (71%),
support from the SK Group (44%), and scholarships (44%) as the three most valuable benefits from
the program.
Investor community. Among the items on alumni services in our survey, KSEMP alumni chose
support for investor attraction the most (69%), followed by human networks (51%), market building
(49%), co-working space (26%), and others (5%). For the growth of social enterprise startups, it is
essential to raise capital. KSEMP has endeavored to form a strong network of investors so that students
can gain access to impact investors. On a regular basis, KSEMP invites influential investors and
connects them to a selection of KSEMP companies. It was officially announced that, from July 2018 to
June 2019, 10 KSEMP companies (including four alumni companies) attracted investment from various
investors. KAIST Venture Investment Holdings (KVI), founded by KAIST and the SK Group, is a good
example of a KSEMP partner that invests in social enterprise startups. In 2014–2019, KVI invested in
11 KSEMP companies, including a vegan food manufacturing company, a caregiver matching service
platform, and a fintech startup for the younger generation without credit scores.
Corporate partners. KSEMP involves many external investors and industry experts in association
with its core activities, such as recruitment, student evaluation, special lecture series, special instances of
mentoring (46 external mentors as of August 2020), research projects, database construction, and even
strategy planning to secure proper expertise and objectivity. In addition to the SK Group, there are
many other industry partners of KSEMP and its students. For example, Shinhan, one of the largest
financial groups in Korea, supported a pilot project of a KSEMP company for recruiting disabled
individuals, and D.CAMP, founded by the Korea Federation of Banks, supported an eight week
education program taught by KSEMP faculty for non-KSEMP talent in the social enterprise ecosystem.
learning trips, and donations by KSEMP startups. This shared information contributes to the ecosystem
directly by promoting business collaboration opportunities and indirectly by attracting capable human
resources—e.g., entrepreneurs, employees, customers, researchers, and reporters—to the ecosystem
4.2.5. Environment
According to Carayannis et al. [55], the last helix is the natural environment. Given that challenges
to sustainability are surging worldwide, it is becoming more important for the ecosystem. Humankind
should proactively continue learning from the environment, which can determine the consequences
and processes of any type of innovation. The environment provides such new knowledge as green
know-how and can contribute to the innovation of the ecosystem.
KSEMP has many cases of entrepreneurs who are addressing environmental problems, including
fine dust, food waste, diaper waste, clothes waste, CO2 from excessive meat consumption, and the
oversupply of milk. KSEMP startups are inventing innovative solutions to these problems, such as
outdoor air cleaners, a takeout food sales platform for single-person households, paper sterilization
and recycling technology development, milk-based edible clay toys, a vegan community platform,
plant-based meats, zero-waste fashion manufacturing, and a fashion goods sharing platform.
and examples of brands that are widely known to the public due to their impact in the market.
To accomplish this goal, a more growth-oriented culture should be formed in KSEMP, and more
challenging experiments should also be conducted to provide intensive support to startups with
growth potential, rather than support from an equality perspective.
Concerning external connectivity with the natural environment, it seems that environmental issues
are not currently considered the most important issue; rather, in KSEMP, they are formally considered
one of many different social problems, although many students voluntarily address such issues.
However, considering the impact of issues related to the environment as a source of innovation and as
a determinant of human destiny, KSEMP must build an identity that is oriented toward technology
and make an explicit commitment to environmental issues. Collaboration with the Graduate School
of Green Growth in the KAIST College of Business and other colleges in KAIST, including the
Graduate School of Energy, Environment, Water, and Sustainability (EEWS), could help KSEMP to
build a technology-oriented identity focused on environmental issues. In addition, forming a research
collaboration network with science and engineering colleges in other universities, government-funded
research institutes for environmental technology, and non-government organizations and global
companies closely related to environmental issues could enhance KSEMP’s understanding of such
issues and the specific capabilities for managing them.
For effective and efficient information sharing, which is the most important aspect of collaboration,
business processes should be closely observed, objectively measured, and systematically managed,
and related data should be generated. Hence, KSEMP should emphasize the importance of data
analyses and teach skills related to such analyses so that students voluntarily measure their financial
performance and social impact based on the data accumulated from their business activities. After all,
KSEMP can establish a data hub that collects and integrates such data to create additional value and
catalyze its internal and external connectivity, also contributing to the EE.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization: M.G.K. and H.S.; methodology: M.G.K. and J.-H.L.; formal analysis:
M.G.K. and J.-H.L.; data curation: M.G.K.; writing—original draft preparation: M.G.K. and H.S.; writing—review
and editing: J.-H.L. and T.R.; project administration: M.G.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was supported by the Happiness Foundation of the SK Group.
Acknowledgments: This research was able to be conducted due to the full and complete support provided by the
Happiness Foundation of the SK Group. In many ways, the authors are indebted to the genuine, all-encompassing,
and unshakable endeavors of the Happiness Foundation to build a society where everyone can share in happiness.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 21 of 23
Appendix A
Female 2
Gender
Male 20
Age Evenly distributed from 30 s to 60 s
Interviewees
Professor 8
(N = 22)
CEO 8
Corporate Executive 2
Job
Corporate Employee 1
NGO Executive 1
NGO Employee 2
Length About 60–80 min
Language Korean
Question type Open-ended question
References
1. Howorth, C.; Smith, S.M.; Parkinson, C. Social learning and social entrepreneurship education. Acad. Manag.
Learn. Educ. 2012, 11, 371–389. [CrossRef]
2. Kramer, M.R.; Porter, M.E. Creating shared value. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2011, 89, 62–77.
3. Cochran, P.L. The evolution of corporate social responsibility. Bus. Horiz. 2007, 50, 449–454. [CrossRef]
4. Chell, E. Social enterprise and entrepreneurship: Towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process.
Int. Small Bus. J. 2007, 25, 5–26. [CrossRef]
5. Chell, E.; Nicolopoulou, K.; Karataş-Özkan, M. Social entrepreneurship and enterprise: International and
innovation perspectives. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2010, 22, 485–493. [CrossRef]
6. Ramus, T.; Vaccaro, A. Stakeholders matter: How social enterprises address mission drift. J. Bus. Ethics 2017,
143, 307–322. [CrossRef]
7. Doherty, B.; Haugh, H.; Lyon, F. Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda.
Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2014, 16. [CrossRef]
8. Jenner, P.; Florin, O. The sectorial trust of social enterprise: Friend or foe? J. Soc. Entrep. 2016, 7, 236–261.
[CrossRef]
9. Bloom, P.N.; Smith, B.R. Identifying the drivers of social entrepreneurial impact: Theoretical development
and an exploratory empirical test of SCALERS. J. Soc. Entrep. 2010, 1, 126–145. [CrossRef]
10. Marshall, R.S. Conceptualizing the international for-profit social entrepreneur. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 98, 183–198.
[CrossRef]
11. Hockerts, K. The effect of experiential social entrepreneurship education on intention formation in students.
J. Soc. Entrep. 2018, 9, 234–256. [CrossRef]
12. Youtie, J.; Shapira, P. Building an innovation hub: A case study of the transformation of university roles in
regional technological and economic development. Res. Policy 2008, 37, 1188–1204. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 22 of 23
13. Jensen, T.L. A holistic person perspective in measuring entrepreneurship education impact—Social
entrepreneurship education at the Humanities. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2014, 12, 349–364. [CrossRef]
14. Brock, D.D.; Steiner, S. Social entrepreneurship education: Is it achieving the desired aims? SSRN Electron. J. 2009.
[CrossRef]
15. Tracey, P.; Phillips, N. The distinctive challenge of educating social entrepreneurs: A postscript and rejoinder
to the special issue on entrepreneurship education. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2007, 6, 264–271. [CrossRef]
16. Lawrence, T.; Phillips, N.; Tracey, P. From the guest editors: Educating social entrepreneurs and social
innovators. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2012, 11, 319–323. [CrossRef]
17. Zhu, Y.; Rooney, D.; Phillips, N. Practice-based wisdom theory for integrating institutional logics: A new
model for social entrepreneurship learning and education. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2016, 15, 607–625.
[CrossRef]
18. Kirby, D.; Ibrahim, N. The case for (Social) entrepreneurship education in Egyptian Universities. J. Educ. Train.
2011, 53, 403–415. [CrossRef]
19. Dobele, L. A new approach in higher education: Social entrepreneurship education. In Volume of Management,
Enterprise and Benchmarking in the 21st Century III; Michelberger, P., Ed.; Óbuda University: Budapest,
Hungary, 2016; pp. 227–238.
20. Pache, A.-C.; Chowdhury, I. Social entrepreneurs as institutionally embedded entrepreneurs: Toward a new
model of social entrepreneurship education. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2012, 11, 494–510. [CrossRef]
21. Bahrami, H.; Evans, S. Flexible re-cycling and high-technology entrepreneurship. Calif. Manag. Rev. 1995,
37, 62–89. [CrossRef]
22. Maritz, A.; Koch, A.; Schmidt, M. The role of entrepreneurship education programs in national systems of
entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship ecosystems. Int. J. Organ. Innov. 2016, 8, 7–26.
23. Spilling, O.R. The entrepreneurial system: On entrepreneurship in the context of a mega-event. J. Bus. Res.
1996, 36, 91–103. [CrossRef]
24. Spigel, B. The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrep. Theory Prac. 2017, 41, 49–72.
[CrossRef]
25. Freeman, C. Technological infrastructure and international competitiveness. Ind. Corp. Chang. 2004,
13, 541–569. [CrossRef]
26. Edquist, C. Systems of innovation: Perspectives and challenges. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2010, 2, 14–45.
[CrossRef]
27. Lundvall, B.Å. National innovation systems—Analytical concept and development tool. Ind. Innov. 2007,
14, 95–119. [CrossRef]
28. Porter, M.E. Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1998, 76, 77–90.
29. Engel, J.S.; del-Palacio, I. Global networks of clusters of innovation: Accelerating the innovation process.
Bus. Horiz. 2009, 52, 493–503. [CrossRef]
30. Clarysse, B.; Wright, M.; Bruneel, J.; Mahajan, A. Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between
knowledge and business ecosystems. Res. Policy 2014, 43, 1164–1176. [CrossRef]
31. Link, A.N.; Scott, J.T. US science parks: The diffusion of an innovation and its effects on the academic
missions of universities. In Universities and the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem; Audretsch, D.B., Link, A.N., Eds.;
Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2017; pp. 3–36.
32. Whittington, K.B.; Owen-Smith, J.; Powell, W.W. Networks, propinquity, and innovation in
knowledge-intensive industries. Adm. Sci. Q. 2009, 54, 90–122. [CrossRef]
33. Baptista, R. Clusters, innovation and growth: A survey of the literature. In The Dynamics of Industrial
Clusters: International Comparisons in Computing and Biotechnology; Swann, G.M.P., Prevezer, M., Stout, D.,
Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1998; pp. 13–51.
34. Moore, J.F. Predators and prey: A new ecology of competition. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1993, 71, 75–86. [PubMed]
35. Isenberg, D. The big idea: How to start an entrepreneurial revolution. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2010, 88, 40–50.
36. Adner, R. Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2006, 84, 98.
[PubMed]
37. Feld, B. Startup Communities: Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem in Your City; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2012.
38. Roundy, P.T.; Bradshaw, M.; Brockman, B.K. The emergence of entrepreneurial ecosystems: A complex
adaptive systems approach. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 86, 1–10. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 9736 23 of 23
39. Fuster, E.; Padilla-Meléndez, A.; Lockett, N.; del-Águila-Obra, A.R. The emerging role of university spin-off
companies in developing regional entrepreneurial university ecosystems: The case of Andalusia. Technol. For.
Soc. Chang. 2019, 141, 219–231. [CrossRef]
40. Carree, M.; Malva, A.D.; Santarelli, E. The contribution of universities to growth: Empirical evidence for
Italy. J. Technol. Transf. 2014, 39, 393–414. [CrossRef]
41. Guerrero, M.; Urbano, D.; Cunningham, J.; Organ, D. Entrepreneurial universities in two European regions:
A case study comparison. J. Technol. Transf. 2014, 39, 415–434. [CrossRef]
42. Hayter, C.S. A trajectory of early-stage spinoff success: The role of knowledge intermediaries within
an entrepreneurial university ecosystem. Small Bus. Econ. 2016, 47, 633–656. [CrossRef]
43. Lubik, S.; Garnsey, E.; Minshall, T.; Platts, K. Value creation from the innovation environment: Partnership
strategies in university spin-outs. R&D Manag. 2013, 43, 136–150. [CrossRef]
44. Autio, E.; Kenney, M.; Mustar, P.; Siegel, D.; Wright, M. Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of
context. Res. Policy 2014, 43, 1097–1108. [CrossRef]
45. Borgatti, S.P.; Cross, R. A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Manag. Sci.
2003, 49, 432–445. [CrossRef]
46. Acs, Z.J.; Braunerhjelm, P.; Audretsch, D.B.; Carlsson, B. The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship.
Small Bus. Econ. 2009, 32, 15–30. [CrossRef]
47. Hayter, C.S. Conceptualizing knowledge-based entrepreneurship networks: Perspectives from the literature.
Small Bus. Econ. 2013, 41, 899–911. [CrossRef]
48. Phelps, C.; Heidl, R.; Wadhwa, A. Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: A review and research
agenda. J. Manag. 2012, 38, 1115–1166. [CrossRef]
49. Bacq, S.; Eddleston, K.A. A resource-based view of social entrepreneurship: How stewardship culture
benefits scale of social impact. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 152, 589–611. [CrossRef]
50. Sharir, M.; Lerner, M. Gauging the success of social ventures initiated by individual social entrepreneurs.
J. World Bus. 2006, 41, 6–20. [CrossRef]
51. Shaw, E.; Carter, S. Social entrepreneurship: Theoretical antecedents and empirical analysis of entrepreneurial
processes and outcomes. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2007, 14, 418–434. [CrossRef]
52. Engel, J.S.; del-Palacio, I. Global clusters of innovation: The case of israel and silicon valley. Calif. Manag. Rev.
2011, 53, 27–49. [CrossRef]
53. Carayannis, E.G.; Grigoroudis, E.; Campbell, D.F.J.; Meissner, D.; Stamati, D. The ecosystem as
helix: An exploratory theory-building study of regional co-opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as
quadruple/quintuple helix innovation models. R&D Manag. 2018, 48, 148–162. [CrossRef]
54. Carayannis, E.G.; Campbell, D.F.J. Triple helix, quadruple helix and quintuple helix and how do knowledge,
innovation and the environment relate to each other? A proposed framework for a trans-disciplinary analysis
of sustainable development and social ecology. Int. J. Soc. Ecol. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 1, 41–69. [CrossRef]
55. Carayannis, E.G.; Barth, T.D.; Campbell, D.F.J. The Quintuple Helix innovation model: Global warming as
a challenge and driver for innovation. J. Innov. Entrep. 2012, 1, 2. [CrossRef]
56. Ministry of Employment and Labor. The 3rd Basic Plan for Social Enterprise Promotion (2018–2022); Ministry of
Employment and Labor: Sejong City, Korea, 2018.
57. Son, H.; Lee, J.; Chung, Y. Value creation mechanism of social enterprises in manufacturing industry:
Empirical evidence from Korea. Sustainability 2018, 10, 46. [CrossRef]
58. OECD. Boosting Social Enterprise Development: Good Practice Compendium; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2017.
59. Prasetyo, A.H.; Lo, W.; Chang, A. Network model for social entrepreneurships: Pathways to sustainable
competitive advantage. J. Small Bus. Entrep. Dev. 2016, 4, 44–53. [CrossRef]
60. Motoyama, Y.; Knowlton, K. Examining the connections within the startup ecosystem: A case study of St.
Louis. Entrep. Res. J. 2017, 7. [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: