Reconfiguring social economy meso institutions to deal with uncertainty. The case of CGM National Consortium

Journal title STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI
Author/s Francesca Battistoni, Giulio Quaggiotto, Flaviano Zandonai
Publishing Year 2024 Issue 2024/1
Language Italian Pages 17 P. 112-128 File size 141 KB
DOI 10.3280/SO2024-001004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

How can social economy institutions be reconfigured to become more effec-tive in dealing with uncertainty? This paper identifies in meso institutions that op-erate between bottom-up initiatives and top-down guidelines, a field of study that can redefine the role and the development of social organizations. In particular, it examines the case of the national consortium CGM to understand how this im-portant Italian network of social enterprises intends to act as a "reconfigurator" of local welfare systems and inclusive economies to address the main social and en-vironmental challenges. This has involved the adoption of a new strategic ap-proach that evolve from a classic action program to a "compass" and a reorgani-zation of its network by approaching digital transformation and reinterpreting the platform business model. The article will focus on the tensions and opportunities that are emerging from this process, while also pointing to broader lessons for insti-tutional innovation.

Keywords: meso institutions, social economy, social enterprise, strategic plan-ning, change management, institutional innovation.

  1. Arcidiacono, D.L., Pais, I., Zandonai, F. (2021), “Plat-Firming Welfare: trasformazione digitale nei servizi di cura locali”, Autonomie locali e servizi sociali, vol. 3 2021, pp. 493-511.
  2. Bandera, L., Fraticelli, F., Riva, P. (2023), Digitale per bene. Storie di realtà del Terzo Settore di fronte alle sfide della trasformazione digitale, Milano, Techsoup Italia e Percorsi di secondo welfare.
  3. Becattini, G. (2015), La coscienza dei luoghi. Il territorio come soggetto corale, Roma, Donzelli editore.
  4. Begovic, M., Quaggiotto, G. (2022), “Pivoting to strategic innovation: 3 things we learned along the way”, Medium – UNDP Strategic Innovation, 16 agosto 2022.
  5. Bobba, L., Fici, A., Gagliardi, C. (eds.) (2022), Le “nuove” imprese sociali. Tendenze e prospettive dopo la riforma del terzo settore, Napoli, Editoriale scientifica.
  6. Borzaga, C., Calzaroni, M., Fontanari, E., Lori, M. (eds.) (2021), L’economia sociale in Italia. Dimensioni, caratteristiche e settori chiave, Rapporto di ricerca.
  7. Borzaga, C., Musella, M. (a cura di) (2021), L’impresa sociale in Italia. IV Rapporto Iris Network. Identità, ruoli e resilienza, Trento, Iris Network.
  8. Borzaga, C., Sacchetti, S. (2015), “Why Social Enterprises are Asking to be Multi-Stakeholder and Deliberative: An Explanation Around the Cost of Exclusion”, Euricse working papers, 75/15.
  9. Bonomi, A., Rullani, E. (2005), Il capitalismo personale. Vite al lavoro, Torino, Einaudi.
  10. Buciuni, G., Corò, G. (2023), Periferie competitive. Lo sviluppo dei territori nell’economia della conoscenza, Bologna, Il Mulino.
  11. Busacca, M., Zandonai, F. (2020), “Platform social enterprises as a new model for co-production”, Studi organizzativi, vol. 1, fascicolo 2, pp. 61-86.
  12. Carbognin, M. (eds.) (1999), Il campo di fragole. Reti di imprese e reti di persone nelle imprese sociali italiane, Milano, Franco Angeli.
  13. Cattapan, N., Battistoni, F. (2022), “Dalle transizioni alle sfide per l’innovazione trasformativa”, che-Fare, 2 novembre 2022.
  14. Coenen, L., Hansen, T., Rekers, J.V. (2015), “Innovation Policy for Grand Challenges. An Economic Geography Perspective”, Geography Compass, vol. 9, Issue 9, September 2015, pp. 483-496.
  15. Consorzio nazionale CGM (2023), CGM in trasformazione: una bussola per orientare scopo, direzioni e funzioni, Milano, Piano di sviluppo con il supporto di Socialseed.
  16. Cooper, N., Hazeldine, S., Quaggiotto, G. (2017), “Two Paths to Supporting Grassroots Innovation”, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Jul. 18 2017.
  17. De Leonardis, O. (2001), Le Istituzioni. Come e perché parlarne, Roma, Carocci editore.
  18. DiMaggio, P., Powell, W.W. (1983), “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institution Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields”, American Sociological Review, vol. 48, n. 2, pp. 147-160.
  19. Donolo, C. (1997), L’intelligenza delle istituzioni, Milano, Feltrinelli.
  20. Dopfer, K, Foster, J., Potts, J. (2004), “Micro-meso-macro”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14, pp. 263-279.
  21. Elsner, W. (2011), “Why Meso? On Aggregation and Emergence, and Why and How the Meso Level is Essential in Social Economics”, Forum for Social Economics, vol. 36, 2007, Issue 1., pp. 1-16.
  22. Elsner, W., Heinrich, T. (2009), “A simple theory of ‘meso’. On the co-evolution of institutions and platform size – With an application to varieties of capitalism and ‘medium-sized countries’”, The journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 38, Issue 5, October 2009, pp. 843-858.
  23. Esposito, R. (2023), Vitam instituere. Genealogia dell’istituzione, Torino, Einaudi.
  24. European Commission (2021), Building an economy that works for people: an action plan for the social economy, Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
  25. European Union (2020), Social Enterprises and their Ecosystems in Europe. Comparative Synthesis Report, Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
  26. Fici, A., Rossi, E., Sepio, G., Venturi, P. (2020), Dalla parte del Terzo settore. La Riforma letta dai suoi protagonisti, Bari-Roma, Laterza.
  27. Fisher, M. (2018), Realismo capitalista, Roma, Nero editions.
  28. Geels, W.F. (2020), Transformative innovation and socio-technical transitions to address Grand Challenges, European Commission working paper.
  29. Gerli, F., Calderini, M., Chiodo, V. (2021), “An ecosistemic model for the technological development of social entrepreneurship: exploring clusters of social innovation”, European Planning Studies, volume 30, Issue 10, 2022, pp. 1962-1984.
  30. Hodgson, G. M. (2000), “From micro to macro: The concept of emergence and the role of institutions”, in L. Burlamaqui, et al. (eds.), Institutions and the role of the state, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, pp.103–126.
  31. Lampugnani, D. (2018), Co-Economy: forme di scambio per la coesione sociale, Milano, Fondazione Giangiacomo Feltrinelli.
  32. Magnaghi, A. (2020), Il principio territoriale, Torino, Bollati Boringhieri.
  33. March, J.G., Olsen, J.P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. New York, The Free Press.
  34. Mazzucato M. (2022), Mission Economy: A Moonshot Guide to Changing Capitalism, London, Penguin Books.
  35. Ménard, C. (2017), “Meso-institutions: The variety of regulatory arrangements in the water sector”, Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pp. 6-19.
  36. Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D. (2019), Advanced Introduction to Social Innovation, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  37. Pais, I., Stark, D. (2020), “Algorithmic Management in the Platform Economy”, Sociologica, vol. 14, No. 3(2020), pp. 47-72.
  38. Piangerelli, L., Rago, S., Venturi, P. (2018), Reti e strategie cooperative per generare valore, Rapporto di ricerca, Aiccon – Scuola d’impresa sociale.
  39. Roelants, B. (2010), “Worker Co-operatives and Socio-economic Development: The Role of Meso-level Institutions”, Economic Analysis, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 67-83.
  40. Sendra, P., Sennett, R. (2020), Designing Disorder: Experiments and Disruption in the City, London - New York, Verso.
  41. Shafik, M. (2021), Quello che ci unisce. Un nuovo contratto sociale per il XXI secolo, Milano, Mondadori.
  42. Tombari, M. (a cura di) (2019), Pubblico, territoriale, aziendale. Il welfare del Gruppo cooperativo CGM, Milano, Esté.
  43. van Wijk, J., Zietsma, C., Dorado, S., de Bakker, F.G.A., Martì, I. (2019), “Social Innovation: Integrating Micro, Meso and Macro Level Insights from Institutional Theory”, Business & Society, Vol. 58, Issue 5, pp. 887-918.
  44. Venturi, P., Zandonai, F. (a cura di) (2014), Ibridi organizzativi. L’innovazione sociale generata dal Gruppo cooperativo CGM, Bologna, Il Mulino.
  45. Weick, K. (2000), Making Sense of the Organization, Hoboken, Wiley-Blackwell.
  46. Yin, R.K. (2017), Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods; Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

Francesca Battistoni, Giulio Quaggiotto, Flaviano Zandonai, Ridisegnare le meso istituzioni dell’economia sociale per affrontare l'incertezza. Il caso del Consorzio nazionale CGM in "STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI " 1/2024, pp 112-128, DOI: 10.3280/SO2024-001004