References of "Rijpens, Julie"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailExplaining stakeholder involvement in social enterprise governance through resources and legitimacy
Huybrechts, Benjamin ULg; Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg; Rijpens, Julie ULg

in Defourny, Jacques; Hulgard, Lars; Pestoff, Victor (Eds.) Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective (2014)

In the continuity of stakeholder theory, much of the current literature on (corporate) governance and business ethics looks at how organizations involve their stakeholders at different decision-making ... [more ▼]

In the continuity of stakeholder theory, much of the current literature on (corporate) governance and business ethics looks at how organizations involve their stakeholders at different decision-making levels (Carroll 2004; Clarkson 1995; de Graaf & Herkströter 2007; Freeman & Reed 1983). According to Freeman (1984), stakeholders are ‘any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of an organization's purpose’ (148); typically: the owners, the managers, the workers, the volunteers, the financing bodies, the partners, the suppliers, the customers/beneficiaries, etc. A continuum of involvement can be highlighted, from the rather passive strategies (stakeholder information) to the more active ones (stakeholder representation). Among the latter, involvement or ‘cooptation’ of stakeholders in the governance structures such as the general assembly and the board of directors is increasingly presented as a strategy mirroring a long-term relationship between the organization and a particular stakeholder category (Mitchell et al. 1997). Traditionally, the owners are the category of stakeholders that is co-opted in the governance structures. Indeed, the power of decision is part of the property rights (Milgrom & Roberts 1992). It allows owners to ensure that the enterprise is run according to their own objectives. Thus, in for-profit enterprises, the investors are the owners and, as such, they have the right to decide. They exercise this right by their presence at the general assembly. But not all enterprises are investors-owned firms. In some enterprises, ownership is in the hand of other stakeholders, like in producer, consumer or worker cooperatives. Others, like nonprofit organizations, can even be seen as firms without owners (Hansmann 1996). This chapter raises the question of stakeholder involvement in social enterprises, which are ‘non-investor owned’ and can broadly be defined here as organizations pursuing social aims through their economic activity (Defourny 2001; Defourny & Nyssens 2006). In these organizations, the configuration of stakeholder involvement contrasts with that of for-profit businesses in at least two ways. First, social enterprises are more likely than other types of organizations to be set up through a process of collective entrepreneurship which often involves a diversity of actors who each have a ‘stake’ in the pursuit of one or several organizational missions (Defourny & Nyssens 2006; Haugh 2007; Petrella 2003). Second, social enterprises seem to have a stronger tendency to give a voice to the actors with whom they interact –i.e., to involve their beneficiaries, supporters, funders or partners within their governance structures (Campi et al. 2006; Huybrechts 2010; Münkner 2004; Rijpens 2010). They usually use legal forms that allow and encourage economic democracy by recognizing stakeholders other than investors the right to participate formally in the governance bodies. While, as suggested by Campi et al. (2006; 2012), the presence of multiple stakeholders observed in a number of social enterprises may be linked with the diverse goals pursued by these organizations, such presence –or absence– may be due to many factors which have no direct links with organizational goals. As suggested in this chapter, the organizational need for resources (in a broad sense) and the drive to conform to external expectations may be two key factors. In any case, the diversified patterns of stakeholder involvement in social enterprises confirm the need for a more comprehensive account of stakeholder involvement in these organizations. Although several attempts have been made to theorize stakeholder involvement in social enterprise governance, it is still a much under-researched topic. We believe that this research gap is due not only to the infancy stage in which social enterprise research is located, but also to a lack of connection and integration of this research within the broader study of organizations. Indeed, while new theoretical developments centered on the specific features of social enterprise are needed, these developments cannot be made independently from the knowledge built for more than a century regarding how organizations are structured and operate. This chapter aims to examine stakeholder involvement in social enterprise governance using two types of theoretical lenses each embodying a rich research tradition in organization theory. The first lens refers to strategy and examines organizations (in this case governance structures) in terms of their dependency on a set of resources. The second lens uses legitimacy arguments to explain organizational governance as a social construct located in a broader setting of social relationships. The first two sections will present each of these views and examine their contributions to understanding stakeholder involvement in the governance structures of social enterprises. Then, a comparative case study on work integration social enterprises will serve to illustrate how both research avenues can be combined so as to better grasp social enterprise governance as a complex and multi-dimensional practice. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 542 (15 ULg)
Full Text
See detailVolontaire de gestion... Et pourquoi pas? Outils pour les volontaires de gestion dans l’action associative et culturelle
Rijpens, Julie ULg

Book published by Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles (2012)

Les volontaires de gestion sont ceux qui s’impliquent et prennent des responsabilités dans les instances décisionnelles des associations ; leur rôle est donc essentiel pour entretenir et surtout maintenir ... [more ▼]

Les volontaires de gestion sont ceux qui s’impliquent et prennent des responsabilités dans les instances décisionnelles des associations ; leur rôle est donc essentiel pour entretenir et surtout maintenir la dynamique associative. Les difficultés auxquelles ils sont confrontés sont pourtant nombreuses : confusion des rôles entre assemblée générale, conseil d’administration et coordination/direction, manque d’information et d’outils, difficulté de mobiliser des personnes impliquées, manque de compétences et/ou de formation pour mener à bien leur rôle de membre et/ou d’administrateur, etc. Cette brochure entend apporter des réponses concrètes aux questions que se posent les volontaires de gestion engagés dans les organes de décision et de gestion des associations. Elle constitue un premier outil important pour apporter certains repères et aider les volontaires de gestion à aborder leur rôle de membre ou d’administrateur dans l’action associative et culturelle. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 68 (7 ULg)
Peer Reviewed
See detailLegitimacy in social enterprises: is it also a question of governance?
Rijpens, Julie ULg

Conference (2011, July 09)

Detailed reference viewed: 18 (2 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLa gouvernance dans les ASBL: dans quels cadres jouent les acteurs associatifs ?
Rijpens, Julie ULg; Adam, Sophie ULg

in Dossiers d'ASBL Actualités (Les) (2011), 12

Detailed reference viewed: 137 (14 ULg)
Full Text
See detailDe l'exercice de la démocratie dans les entreprises sociales
Rijpens, Julie ULg; Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg

Article for general public (2010)

Detailed reference viewed: 18 (4 ULg)
Full Text
See detailLa gouvernance dans les entreprises sociales
Rijpens, Julie ULg

in Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille (Ed.) La gestion des entreprises sociales (2010)

Detailed reference viewed: 303 (25 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailQuestion de gouvernance : qui est propriétaire d'une asbl ?
Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg; Rijpens, Julie ULg; Hurdebise, Lionel ULg

Article for general public (2010)

Detailed reference viewed: 129 (23 ULg)
Full Text
See detailEntreprendre en économie sociale
Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg; Rijpens, Julie ULg

in Janssen, Frank (Ed.) Entreprendre : Manuel d'introduction (2009)

This chapter aims to introduce social entrepreneurship; to explain why this type of entreprises does exist and what are their main characteristics.

Detailed reference viewed: 173 (20 ULg)
Peer Reviewed
See detailRoles and composition of nonprofit boards: a dynamic vision
Rijpens, Julie ULg; Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg

Conference (2008, July 11)

For decades, scientific literature identifies the roles that a nonprofit board should assume, adopting too often a normative and static view on the issue. If a clear view is absolutely desirable, we ... [more ▼]

For decades, scientific literature identifies the roles that a nonprofit board should assume, adopting too often a normative and static view on the issue. If a clear view is absolutely desirable, we refuse to endorse simplistic views on governance. Indeed, the heterogeneity of nonprofit organizations, the diversity of governance mechanisms, the fact that external and internal pressures do design governance models and the importance of time factor lead us to consider that governance models cannot be established once and for all but have to be thought in a dynamic process. The model that we present here underlies a dynamic vision of the roles and the composition of nonprofit boards. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 86 (8 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLa gouvernance en associations : pour une vision dynamique du CA
Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg; Rijpens, Julie ULg

Article for general public (2008)

Detailed reference viewed: 108 (15 ULg)
Full Text
See detailLa gouvernance en associations : pour une vision dynamique du CA
Mertens de Wilmars, Sybille ULg; Rijpens, Julie ULg

in Dossiers d'ASBL Actualités (Les) (2008), 108

Depuis des décennies, la littérature scientifique en sciences de gestion identifie les différents rôles traditionnellement dévolus aux conseils d'administration des associations. Si la clarté dans la ... [more ▼]

Depuis des décennies, la littérature scientifique en sciences de gestion identifie les différents rôles traditionnellement dévolus aux conseils d'administration des associations. Si la clarté dans la définition des rôles respectifs semble évidemment souhaitable, elle n'implique pas pour autant que la répartition des rôles s'opère de manière identique et immuable dans chaque association. Au contraire, de récents travaux de recherche soulignent combien des éléments internes ou des facteurs externes à l'association influencent l'ordonnancement des différents rôles. Le modèle que nous présentons ici sous-tend la vision dynamique d'un conseil d'administration associatif [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 158 (11 ULg)
Full Text
See detailLes associations en Belgique. Une analyse quantitative et qualitative du secteur - Edition 2008
Marée, Michel ULg; Rijpens, Julie ULg; Gijselinckx, Caroline et al

Book (2008)

This publication is a direct follow-up to and an update of the previous publication on organizations in Belgium that appeared at the end of 2005. The aim is to provide the general public with a dynamic ... [more ▼]

This publication is a direct follow-up to and an update of the previous publication on organizations in Belgium that appeared at the end of 2005. The aim is to provide the general public with a dynamic description of the non-profit sector (associations) in Belgium via a quantitative and a qualitative analysis on the basis of the most recent data, while comparing it to previous data. A quantitative analysis of the sector has been made under three headings. The first chapter “The satellite account of the NPI” takes up and comments on the principal figures from the statistics generated by the National Bank with regards to what is known as “non-profit institutions”(NPI),associations and foundations. Production, contribution to the added value of the country, principal financial sources, covered costs,... form the main topics that are focussed on. The evolution of the sector over the period 2000 – 2004 is also outlined. The second chapter, “Employment in non-profit organizations”, focuses on the work factor in the nonprofit organizations that, in terms of salaried employment, represent the bulk of employment in the NPI’s. The third chapter, “Foundations in Belgium” focuses on the sector of the foundations that serve a public non-profit goal (the foundations beneficial to the public and the private foundations from which one can suppose that they serve a non-profit objective that goes beyond the pure private character). Strictly speaking, foundations are not associations, and yet they do have a number of things in common. They do not have a profit motive. Via their financing, they contribute in a broad sense to the dynamism of the sector and of civilian society. Chapter 3 paints a picture of this relatively unknown type of NPI that together do employ a few thousand people and pay out considerable sums of money. Chapter four, “The barometer of the civil society organizations in Belgium in the year 2007” forms the qualitative part of this study. It presents the results of a study that was carried out of 473 civil society organizations in 2007. The aim of the barometer is to get to know the points of view and experiences of the civil society organizations in the field covering a range of subjects: the recent introduction of the new laws concerning non-profit organizations and voluntary work and the evolution in the area of employment, volunteer work, members, sources of income,… Where in 2005 the barometer study was limited to the questioning of umbrella civil society organizations and federations of organizations, the study dug deeper to the level of local organizations, in such a way that will allow this barometer research to be repeated on a regular basis at a later date. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 253 (21 ULg)