Позитивные изменения. Том 2, № 3 (2022). Positive changes. Volume 2, Issue 3 (2022) - Редакция журнала «Позитивные изменения»

Большое спасибо за участие!

СПИСОК ИСТОЧНИКОВ

1. Митина, О. В., & Петренко, В. Ф. (2000). Кросскультурное исследование стереотипов женского поведения (в России и США).

Вопросы психологии, 1, 68–86.

2. Петренко, В. Ф. (2005). Психосемантические аспекты картины мира субъекта. Психология. Журнал высшей школы экономики, 2(2), 3–23.

3. Петренко, В. Ф. (2005). Основы психосемантики. Санкт-Петербург: Издательский дом «Питер».

4. Bruner, J. S., & Tagiuri, R. (1954). Person perception. Handbook of social psychology, 2, 634–654.

5. Kelly, G. (1955). Personal construct psychology. Nueva York: Norton.

6. Moscovici S. et al. (1981). On social representations.

In Social cognition: Perspectives on everyday understanding, 8(12), 181–209.

7. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957).

The measurement of meaning (No. 47). University of Illinois press.

8. Petrenko, V. F., Mitina, O. V., Berdnikov, K. V., Kravtsova, A. R., & Osipova, V. S. (2002). Russian Citizens Perceptions of and Attitudes Toward Foreign Countries and Different Nationalities. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 40(6), 5–27.

A “Lone Wolf” or an Effective Businessman? Comparative Analysis of the Social Entrepreneur’s Image in Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus

Natalia Gladkikh, Olga Mitina

DOI 10.55140/2782–5817–2022–2–3–56–69

Any new phenomenon coming into our life has to go through several stages of acceptance, understanding and interpretation, gradually acquiring new operational meanings — those that reflect their application in real life, as opposed to those specified in the dictionary. This process is all the more difficult when said phenomena apply to several areas of life and multiple target audiences at once — for example, sellers and buyers, teachers and students, governments and businesses, businesses and NGOs. The term “social entrepreneurship” has had just such a difficult fate, and therefore finding its operational meaning seems to be an ever more important and interesting task.

Natalia Gladkikh

PhD in Psychology, Leading Expert, Centre for Technological Innovations, Institute of Social and Economic Design at the Higher School of Economics

Olga Mitina

Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, Leading Researcher at the Communication Psychology Laboratory, Faculty of Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow State University

In this article, we present the results and methodology of a study conducted back in 2017. It was published in an abridged form in English, in a collection of articles on social entrepreneurship in several parts of the world[39], but has not previously been released in its entirety, describing the full methodology. We decided to take this step after discovering that our previous study of the perception of social entrepreneurs, performed on a much smaller scale and using a simplified methodology, which included only two regions (Russia and Kazakhstan), prompted a plethora of other studies following this methodology, with the possibility of comparing the regions among themselves, viewing the situation in dynamic, etc.[40]

Thus, firstly, we would like to show the possibility of applying the extended methodology in the research of the image of social entrepreneurship, based on psychosemantics. Secondly, it seems important to us to enable contemporary researchers to make retrospective comparisons, based on the past data, of changes in the current and future perceptions of social entrepreneurs in these regions. Lastly, it seems that an inquisitive researcher could use the results to predict the current situation with the development of social entrepreneurship in the CIS, which provides an opportunity to do some forecasting for the future.

The discussion related to the image of the social entrepreneur has become particularly relevant in today’s Russia due to the recent legislative enshrinement of the term “social entrepreneurship.” Currently the law does not include, for example, non-profit organizations in the definition of social enterprises (however, they are still not prohibited from selling their goods and services, e.g. in case of autonomous non-profit organizations).

Naturally, all these changes also have an impact on what remains in the minds of different audiences from different countries when they hear this mysterious phrase (which is also contradictory for some audiences) “social entrepreneurship.”

THE IMAGE OF THE SOCIAL ENTREPRENEUR AS AN OBJECT OF RESEARCH

The image of a social entrepreneur can be defined as a complex set of characteristics that includes his/her values, thinking style, specific actions, and the nature of those actions (Bruner, J. & Tagiuri, R., 1954). Unlike authority or reputation, which are formed largely at the cognitive level, the image is formed on the basis of emotional perception rather than on analysis. This perception may not even obey the laws of logic, but rather be formed at an unconscious level.

Understanding the image as a social representation (Moscovici, 1981) allows us to develop an adequate methodology for studying the formation and dynamics of its properties, which are the result of long-term influence and significant transformations. This set of characteristics is, on the one hand, very stable, but on the other hand, it is constantly reinforced and changed in the process of social interactions, adapting to the requirements of a particular situation.

The image of the social entrepreneur is a multidimensional phenomenon. We can describe it through the prism of at least two dimensions: social contribution (the ability to solve social problems) and entrepreneurial potential — financial stability of his/her enterprise, his/her professionalism as a leader, his/her competitiveness, his/her contribution to the economic development. Another possible dimension is the dependence on external resources — the need for support from the government and other sources. The next important aspect is innovation, as this is one of the most significant qualities in the vocabulary of social entrepreneurship. Does this property fit the image of the social entrepreneur in the realities of life? It is important to note that the image of a social entrepreneur should not be complicated and overloaded with different properties or parameters. It should be easy to understand, based on the prevailing views of the population.

This study aims to