ResearchPDF Available

Abstract

A substantial part of the world population lives at the "bottom of the pyramid" (BOP). More than 700 million people, or 10.7% of the world population, live in extreme poverty, with an income of less than 1.9 USD per day (World Bank Group, 2016). When using a threshold income of 2.5 USD per day to define poverty, more than 3 billion people, or more than 40 % of the world population, can actually be considered as living below the poverty line. Poverty alleviation has been addressed by sociologists, political scientist and economists, but in his seminal work, CK Prahalad (2005), a strategic management scholar, developed an appealing new perspective to solve BOP problems. He called upon multinational enterprises (MNEs) to address the issues facing the poor and suggested that they could benefit from the market potential represented by the BOP's potential customer base. In addition to creating market potential, engagement with the BOP would supposedly lead to increased innovativeness inside the MNE (Hart and Sharma, 2005; Michelini, 2012). Unfortunately, in spite of this 'doing well by doing good' perspective, BOP markets have remained largely untapped by MNEs (Karamchandani et al., 2011). With the present call for papers, we would like to celebrate the upcoming 20th anniversary of the BOP conceptualization by Prahalad and Hart (1999), while at the same time inviting a variety of novel approaches to BOP poverty alleviation. Here, Kolk et al.'s (2014) literature review of the first decade (2000-2009) after Prahalad and Hart's (1999) work, suggested that the majority of initiatives at the BOP were initiated by entrepreneurs, NGO and governments, rather than by MNEs They explicitly call for a:
Business & Society Special Issue
New Perspectives on Bottom of the Pyramid Strategies
Guest editors
Nikolay A. Dentchev
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
Alain Verbeke
U Calgary, Canada
Jeremy Hall
Nottingham U, UK
Laura Michelini
LUMSA U, Italy
Jenny Hillemann
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
A substantial part of the world population lives at the “bottom of the pyramid” (BOP). More
than 700 million people, or 10.7% of the world population, live in extreme poverty, with an income
of less than 1.9 USD per day (World Bank Group, 2016). When using a threshold income of 2.5 USD
per day to define poverty, more than 3 billion people, or more than 40 % of the world population, can
actually be considered as living below the poverty line. Poverty alleviation has been addressed by
sociologists, political scientist and economists, but in his seminal work, CK Prahalad (2005), a
strategic management scholar, developed an appealing new perspective to solve BOP problems. He
called upon multinational enterprises (MNEs) to address the issues facing the poor and suggested that
they could benefit from the market potential represented by the BOP’s potential customer base. In
addition to creating market potential, engagement with the BOP would supposedly lead to increased
innovativeness inside the MNE (Hart and Sharma, 2005; Michelini, 2012). Unfortunately, in spite of
this ‘doing well by doing good’ perspective, BOP markets have remained largely untapped by MNEs
(Karamchandani et al., 2011).
With the present call for papers, we would like to celebrate the upcoming 20th anniversary of
the BOP conceptualization by Prahalad and Hart (1999), while at the same time inviting a variety of
novel approaches to BOP poverty alleviation. Here, Kolk et al.’s (2014) literature review of the first
decade (2000 2009) after Prahalad and Hart’s (1999) work, suggested that the majority of initiatives
at the BOP were initiated by entrepreneurs, NGO and governments, rather than by MNEs They
explicitly call for a:
“better understanding of the different roles that large and small MNEs, large and small
domestic companies, social entrepreneurs, and non-for-profit organizations can play in BOP
initiatives.” (p. 353)
Hence, this special issue will encourage scholars to elaborate on new perspectives of BOP
strategies for poverty alleviation. We expect new perspectives to be developed from at least three
different directions, namely social entrepreneurship, BOP business models, and governance (which
do not constitute an exhaustive list). Below, each of these three themes is briefly described.
SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP
The recent special issue of Hart et al. (2016) in Organization & Environment extends the MNE
perspective of BOP strategies toward entrepreneurship, grassroots / social innovation and systemic
innovation. Here, the entrepreneurial perspective is clearly discussed, but social entrepreneurship as
a tool for addressing BOP issues remains underexplored. The potential of social entrepreneurs to
contribute to BOP strategies is highlighted in Zahra et al.’s (2009) typology, especially where they
describe social entrepreneurs with the most significant impact, the so-called “social engineers” who:
“…act as prime movers of innovation and change, engendering “gales of creative destruction”
to destroy dated systems, structures and processes to be replaced by newer and more suitable
ones. By fracturing existing and often dominant institutions and replacing them with more
socially efficient ones, Social Engineers can have a profound influence on society.
Consequently, they can be a powerful force for social change. This is especially true where
entrenched incumbents and prevailing practices have become formidable barriers to reform.
Given the “systemic” nature of the problems they target, Social Engineers often attack
national, transnational or global social issues.” (p. 526)
The above view suggests that the most ambitious social entrepreneurs aim to resolve the most
challenging societal issues, including BOP related challenges. Although the prime focus of social
entrepreneurs might be addressing social issues in their local communities, some challenges are
universal, and generic, best-practice solutions can be further tailored to different contexts. In this vein,
recent studies have pointed out that international social entrepreneurship is a relatively new concept,
defined as:
“the process of creatively discovering and exploiting social entrepreneurial opportunities
overseas with the application of business expertise and market-based skills, with innovative
social goods and services, either with or without profit orientation, but with the pivotal
objective of creating societal value rather than shareholder wealth in the overseas territories
where the enterprise functions” (Tukamushaba et al., 2011, p. 286).
In other words, we can expect social entrepreneurs from BOP markets to have an impact
through disruptive social innovations in developed economies. Microfinance, for example, became a
worldwide practice, embraced in western economies, though it was initiated by Grameen Bank in
Bangladesh. Alternatively, social enterprises from the western countries can organize solutions for
BOP issues, based on specialised knowledge. There are many examples such as Close the Gap
(computers written-off in the west receive a second life in the south), Apopo (detection of landmines
and tuberculosis with rats), Waka Waka (solar technology lighting), and Mobile School (mobile
school for streetkids), to mention only a few. This leads us to the following list of questions:
What are the critical success factors of social enterprises with the ambition to resolve
BOP issues at the global level?
What are the enabling factors and barriers for “born global / BOP” social enterprises?
How can social enterprises collaborate across national borders?
What is the role of immigration in developing international/transnational social
enterprise ventures (SEVs)? What are the antecedents, successful factors and effects
of these enterprises in addressing BOP outcomes?
BOP BUSINESS MODELS
The BOP Global Network, coordinated by Professor Hart, arguably reflects best how BOP strategies
can be made actionable. In its call to join the network, it invites companies, NGOs, entrepreneurs,
multilateral organizations, and academics”. And most of the time, one could expect that a joint effort
of all those parties will be necessary to generate solid BOP strategies (Kolk et al., 2014). Webb et al.
(2009) argue that MNEs should partner with NGOs to mitigate institutional voids. Sharma et al.
(1994) show that MNEs can be a strategic bridge between international development funding
agencies, local governments and entrepreneurs. At the conceptual level, cooperation among various
actors in BOP environments is nothing new. Yet, such cooperation proves apparently quite difficult,
due to institutional voids or overkill, knowledge asymmetries, cultural differences, motivational
challenges, resource incompatibilities, and sometimes even moral hazards.
Overall, the cooperation between multiple stakeholders requires business model analysis at
the meso and macro levels. A joint effort, with multiple logics, and depending on shared value
creation, is most likely characteristic for complex business models in BOP markets. Arguably, BOP
is faced with wicked problems that are considered with the very existence of the population, i.e.
health, food, shelter, and education. Hence, these issues require profound, systemic and sustainable
solutions. This view resonates with Boons and Lüdeke-Freund’s (2013) assertion to study how
business models can lead to systemic innovations. Also Schaltegger et al. (2016), in a recent guest
editorial stress on the necessity to study further business models for sustainability leading to industry
transformations, learning-action networks, and cooperative arrangements. Overall, business model
thinking seems to be a helpful lens to understanding the motivation of various stakeholders (Magretta,
2002) in the implementation of BOP strategies. The above leads us to the following list of questions:
What business models are suitable for the BOP, and why?
How can one build ecosystems in support of BOP business models?
How to manage, scale and innovate BOP business models?
How do digital technologies create new opportunities for BOP business models?
How does the sharing economy enable new forms of BOP business models?
GOVERNANCE
Effectively solving wicked BOP problems requires effective governance. Here, government
undoubtedly has an important role to play (Albareda et al., 2007, Dentchev et al., 2017, Moon, 2002).
While various initiatives (from MNEs, NGOs, social entrepreneurs, entrepreneurs) could lead to
creative solutions, governments can play a material role in facilitating the establishment of ethical
norms, but also through formal institutions. It can support the development of BOP initiatives and
business models, and perform the role of catalyst.
Borrowing from CSR governance (Steurer, 2013), BOP initiatives will require not only
government regulations, but also self regulation at the industrial and organisation levels as well as
civil regulation. While comprehensive typologies for governance exists, the coordinating mechanisms
to steer across governance levels and across jurisdictions require further research. BOP strategies aim
at resolving complex and international issues, involving variety of partners and motivations to be
engaged. Hence, the topic of governance can help us understanding the key success factors of BOP
strategies. In addition to success stories, scholars may want to focus on unravelling data of failed
BOP strategies that seem to be abundant, and thus contribute to solid understanding on the
phenomenon. This leads us to the following list of questions for BOP poverty alleviation:
Different types of governance mechanisms: formal versus informal institutions to govern BOP
initiatives?
How to manage institutional voids versus institutional ‘overkill’ in designing BOP solutions?
What are the new types of firm-government interactions at the BOP?
What are the new types of firm-NGO interactions in BOP strategies?
What are the new types of inter-firm collaboration in BOP strategies?
How to guide asymmetrical network governance for the BOP?
How to organize the governance of global value chains (GVCs) for BOP value creation?
Overall, with this call for papers, we solicit contributions with scholarly rigor and practical relevance.
We welcome the submission of theoretical, empirical and conceptual papers. This special issue
especially likes to encourage submissions that study BOP strategies from novel theoretical
perspectives. In addition to commonly used lenses of the resource-based view (RBV), transaction
cost economics (TCE), entrepreneurship, and stakeholder theory, scholars may consider to study the
phenomenon from the perspective of stewardship theory, collaboration theory, structuration theory,
public choice theory, social network theory, bio-mimicry, ecosystem theory, for example. This is not
an exhaustive list, and the variety of novel theoretical perspectives can only enrich our understanding
of crafting BOP strategies.
To attract papers for the special issue, we will organise a variety of dedicated paper development
workshops (number to be decided). In addition, the special issue will be advertised at a conference in
Sofia (27-28 2018) on new business models, as well as at IABS and AoM. Presentations at these
conferences or workshops are encouraged, but are not a precondition to submit a paper for the special
issue. Since this special issue intends to celebrate 20 years from the BOP conception, we intend to
invite renowned scholars such as Stuart Hart, Sanjay Sharma, Aneel Karnani, and Ans Kolk to
contribute, since they can provide a visionary reflection on this field.
Timeline:
1 April 2019 Full paper submission: Please note that the system will be open for submission only
in the timeframe of one month (1 March till 1 April 2019).
Special Issue Workshops:
Paper Development Workshops will be proposed at IABS 2018 (7-10 June 2018 in Hong Kong) and
at the 3rd International Conference on New Business Models (27-28 June 2018 in Sofia, Bulgaria)
Dedicated special issue workshops will be organized in the fall of 2018:
- Monday 3 Sept. 2018 in Brussels (Belgium) and
- Friday 23 Nov. 2018 in Rome (Italy).
Attendance to these workshops is recommended, but not a prerequisite for submission to the special
issue.
Submission process:
Prior to submission, please read carefully the submission guidelines of Business & Society:
https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/business-society/journal200878#submission-guidelines
Please submit your paper in the timeframe 1 March 2019 and 1 April 2019 electronically via
https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bas while indicating submission to the special issue “New
Perspectives on Bottom of the Pyramid Strategies”.
About the journal:
Business & Society is one of the leading journals at the intersection of business and issues of social
responsibility, ethics and governance. It is published by SAGE and its current two-year Citation
Impact Factor is 3.298 (2016). It was ranked 31 out of 121 journals in the Business category of the
2016 Thomson Reuters Journals Citation Report (ISI). For further details see
http://bas.sagepub.com .
About the guest editors:
Name: Nikolay A. Dentchev
Bio: Nikolay A. Dentchev is Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship and CSR at the Vrije
Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and at KU Leuven, Belgium. He holds the Solvay Business School
Chair of Social Entrepreneurship at VUB, with founding partners Close the Gap, Kluwer Belgium
and Euroclear. Nikolay’s research is published in various indexed journals such as Business &
Society, Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics: A European Review. He serves occasionally
as guest editor to special issues in journals such as Business & Society and Journal of Cleaner
Production. Nikolay’s research interests are related to CSR implementation, social
entrepreneurship, sustainable business models.
Name: Alain Verbeke
Bio: Dr. Alain Verbeke is a Professor of International Business Strategy and holds the McCaig
Research Chair in Management at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary. He was
elected as the Inaugural Alan M. Rugman Memorial Fellow at the Henley Business School,
University of Reading, and is the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of International Business Studies.
He is also an Adjunct Professor at the Solvay Business School, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB).
He has published more than 30 books and numerous refereed articles, including many pieces in
leading scholarly journals such as JIBS, JMS and SMJ.
Name: Jeremy Hall
Bio: Jeremy Hall (D.Phil., University of Sussex, MBA and B.Sc., Dalhousie University) is the
Director of the International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility (ICCSR) and Chaired
Professor of Corporate Social Responsibility/ Sustainable Business. He is also Editor-in-Chief of
the Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, a technology and innovation management
journal with a 2016 impact factor of 2.419. Prior to joining ICCSR, Jeremy was a Professor at the
Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University (Vancouver, Canada), an Associate Professor
at the Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary (Canada), and a Lecturer at SPRU,
University of Sussex (UK). Jeremy’s research interests include the social impacts of innovation &
entrepreneurship, sustainable supply chains and strategies for sustainable development innovation,
where he has collaborated with a range of natural and social scientists. A major stream of his
research is focused on innovation and entrepreneurship for social inclusion in Brazil. Jeremy’s
work has been published in for example Business Strategy and the Environment, California
Management Review, Ecological Economics, Energy Policy, Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice,
Journal of Cleaner Production, International Journal of Production Research, Journal of Business
Ethics, Journal of Business Venturing, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Operations
Management, MIT Sloan Management Review, Research Policy, Research-Technology
Management, Small Business Economics, Technological Forecasting & Social Change and
Technovation. He has been awarded over $1.3 million in research support from for example
Genome Canada and the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada among others.
Name: Laura Michelini
Bio: Laura Michelini is Associate Professor in Management at LUMSA University of Rome, where
she teaches Management and Social Entrepreneurship. She has worked for several years in
UNICEF, where she was in charge of managing profit/not-profit global partnership. Her main
research interests involve: social innovation, inclusive business models, social entrepreneurship,
sharing economy and corporate social responsibility. On these topics she is authored and co-
authored of over 50 publications.
Name: Jenny Hillemann
Bio: Jenny Hillemann (PhD, Vrije Universiteit Brussel) is a postdoctoral fellow at Vrije Universiteit
Brussel, Belgium. She is a Visiting Fellow in International Business and Strategy (2016-2019) at
Henley Business School, University of Reading, UK. Her research includes the managerial analysis
of multinational enterprise strategy and the broader governance challenges facing international
firms. To date, her research contributions have been published as edited book chapters in well-
known book series, and refereed articles in leading scholarly journals such as MBR, IBR and JIBS.
REFERENCES
Boons, F., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. 2013. Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art
and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45: 919.
Dentchev, N. A., Haezendonck, E., & van Balen, M. 2017. The Role of Governments in the
Business and Society Debate. Business and Society, 56(4).
Hart, S. L., & Sharma, S. 2004. Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination. The
Academy of Management Executive, 18(1): 718.
Hart, S., Sharma, S., & Halme, M. 2016. Poverty, Business Strategy, and Sustainable Development.
Organization & Environment, 29(4): 401415.
Karamchandani, A., Kubzansky, M., & Lalwani, N. 2011. Is the Bottom Of the Pyramid Really for
You ? Is the Bottom Of the Pyramid Really for You ? Harvard Business Review, (March):
107111.
Kolk, A., Rivera-Santos, M., & Rufin, C. 2014. Reviewing a Decade of Research on the
“Base/Bottom of the Pyramid” (BOP) Concept. Business & Society, 53(3): 338377.
Magretta, J. 2002. Why Business Models Matter. Harvard Business Review, 80(5): 8692.
Michelini, L. (2012). Social innovation and new business models: creating shared value in low-
income markets. Springer Science & Business Media.
Prahalad, C., & Hart, S. 1999. Strategies for the bottom of the pyramid: creating sustainable
development. Ann Arbor, 126.
Prahlad, C. K. 2005. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits.
New Delhi, India: Wharton School.
Schaltegger, S., Hansen, E. G., & Lüdeke-Freund, F. 2016. Business Models for Sustainability:
Origins, Present Research, and Future Avenues. Organization & Environment, 29(1): 310.
Sharma, S., Vredenburg, H., & Westley, F. 1994. Strategic Bridging: A Role for the Multinational
Corporation in Third World Development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30(4):
458476.
Steurer, R. 2013. Disentangling governance: A synoptic view of regulation by government,
business and civil society. Policy Sciences, 46(4): 387410.
Tukamushaba, E. K., Orobia, L., & George, B. P. 2011. Development of a conceptual model to
understand international social entrepreneurship and its application in the Ugandan context.
Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 9(4): 282298.
Webb, J. W., Kistruck, G. M., Ireland, R. D., & Ketchen, D. J. 2010. The entrepreneurship process
in base of the pyramid markets: The case of multinational enterprise/nongovernment
organization alliances. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(3): 555581.
World Bank Group. 2016. Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2016 Talking on inequality.
Zahra, S. A., Gedajlovic, E., Neubaum, D. O., & Shulman, J. M. 2009. A typology of social
entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. Journal of Business
Venturing, 24(5): 519532.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Chapter
Full-text available
Whether and how “sustainable business models” effectively support sustainable development is not just a matter of design, but also of the measurability and manageability of business model effects. While the interrelations between organisations’ sustainability performance and their business models is discussed in an increasing number of academic and practice publications, appropriate management approaches for the deliberate assessment and management of business models and their expected contributions to a sustainable development of the natural environment and human society are currently not available. Therefore, this chapter discusses this research gap and proposes a conceptual framework for sustainability-oriented business model assessments.
Article
Full-text available
The past 15 years have witnessed an exponential growth in business activities aimed at serving the needs and increasing the well-being of disenfranchised individuals in low-income communities. Thousands of new business initiatives, development institution programs, and innovative investment funds focused on poverty alleviation have emerged during this time. Similarly, since the late 1990s when Prahalad and Hart first coined the term Bottom of Pyramid (BoP), and suggested a new, enterprise-based approach to poverty alleviation, there has also been a steady rise in research on business and poverty. A whole new lexicon emerged to describe this phenomenon, including phrases like “inclusive business,” “subsistence market places,” “frugal innovation,” and “impact investing.” Unfortunately, management theory and research have not advanced at the same pace with the BoP business revolution, and consequently knowledge about parameters for successfully integrating business, poverty alleviation and sustainable development still remains ambiguous.
Article
Full-text available
Governance became a catch-all concept for various forms of steering by state and non-state actors. While it pays tribute to the complexities of steering in poly-centred, globalised societies, its fuzziness makes it difficult to oversee who actually steers whom and with what means. By focussing mainly on actor constellations, the article disentangles governance into seven basic types of regulation, four of them representing public policies with varying degrees of government involvement and three depending solely on civil society (civil regulation), on businesses (industry or business self-regulation) or on both (civil co-regulation). Although each of the seven types is well known and extensively researched, they are rarely joined in a synoptic view, making it difficult to grasp the totality of contemporary governance. After introducing the seven basic types of regulation and co-regulation, the article addresses the interactions between them and it adds the widely used concepts of hybrid regulation and meta-governance in distinct ways. The synoptic view provided here helps to comprehend how governmental deregulation has been accompanied by soft governmental regulation as well as “societal re-regulation”. The concluding discussion emphasises that this “regulatory reconfiguration” is the cumulative product of countless, more or less spontaneous initiatives that coincide with forceful global trends. It also stresses that the various forms of regulation by civil society and business actors are not simply alternatives or complements to but often key prerequisites for effective public policies. Although the essentials of the typology developed here can be applied universally to a variety of policy issues, I focus it on how businesses are steered towards sustainable development and Corporate Social Responsibility.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this paper is to advance research on sustainable innovation by adopting a business model perspective. Through a confrontation of the literature on both topics we find that research on sustainable innovation has tended to neglect the way in which firms need to combine a value proposition, the organization of the upstream and downstream value chain, and a financial model, in order to bring sustainability innovations to the market. Therefore, we review the current literature on business models in the contexts of technological, organizational, and social sustainability innovations. As the current literature does not offer a general conceptual definition of sustainable business models, we propose examples of normative 'boundary conditions' that business models should meet in order to support sustainable innovations. Finally, we sketch the outline of a research agenda by formulating a number of guiding questions.
Article
The relevance of business models for corporate performance in general and corporate sustainability in particular has been widely acknowledged in the literature while sustainable entrepreneurship research has started to explore contributions to the sustainability transformation of markets and society. Particularities of the business models of sustainable niche market pioneers have been identified in earlier research, but little is known about the dynamic role of business models for sustainable entrepreneurship processes aiming at upscaling ecologically and socially beneficial niche models or sustainability upgrading of conventional mass market players. Informed by evolutionary economics, we develop a theoretical framework to analyze co-evolutionary business model development for sustainable niche pioneers and conventional mass market players aiming at the sustainability transformation of markets. Core evolutionary processes of business model variation, selection and retention, and evolutionary pathways are identified to support structured analyses of the dynamics between business model innovation and sustainability transformation of markets.
Article
While a consensus appears to have evolved among many sustainability researchers and practitioners that sustainable development at the societal level is not very likely without the sustainable development of organizations, the business model as a key initiating component of corporate sustainability has only recently moved into the focus of sustainability management research. Apparently, the usual approaches to sustainable development of philanthropy, corporate social responsibility, and technological process and product innovation are insufficient to create the necessary radical transformation of organizations, industries, and societies toward genuine, substantive sustainable development. More in-depth research is needed on whether both modified and completely new business models can help develop integrative and competitive solutions by either radically reducing negative and/or creating positive external effects for the natural environment and society.
Article
The role of governments in business and society (B&S) research remains underexplored. The generally accepted principle of voluntarism, which frames responsible business conduct as an unregulated subject under managerial discretion, accounts for this gap. Paradoxically, there are sufficient acknowledgments in academia and practice on different roles of governments. The present article identifies three broad topics for research, addressing (a) the paradox between the principle of voluntarism and the role of governments in B&S, (b) the boundaries of governments and business in their contribution to B&S issues, and (c) the mechanisms of government intervention that affect corporate social performance. The authors approach the first topic with a literature review of 703 articles marked with the term “government” from five journals in the field (Business & Society, Business Ethics: A European Review, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business Strategy and the Environment, and Journal of Business Ethics) between 1982 and 2011. This study indicates that the principle of voluntarism remains, despite the broad variety of research related to the role of government in B&S. In addition, the identified content provides deeper insight into the mechanisms of government intervention and on the boundaries of governments in the B&S discourse. This article then provides a summary of the other three research articles included in this special research forum, with a contribution oriented toward the latter two research avenues posited.