Social Business and Career Anchors: A Study about the Involvement of University Students

Negócios Sociais e Âncoras de Carreira: Um Estudo sobre o Envolvimento dos Estudantes Universitários

ABSTRACT

Purpose:

the objective of this study is to analyze the career anchors (Schein, 1974) of university students involved in social activities.

Design/methodology/approach:

we chose a quantitative descriptive approach, with the application of a questionnaire to 68 young students participating in the CHOICE ambassador program.

Findings:

results showed the predominance of the service and dedication to a cause anchor, and the relevance of acting in student and volunteer organizations. The career anchor acts as an influencing factor for the interest in social businesses, while previous involvement in other social activities (volunteering and student entities) seems to be the indicator that shows how much the individual will effectively move in the direction of social businesses.

Originality/value:

this result demonstrates the existing alignment between the search for a purpose and working in social businesses. Although the involvement in social activities is becoming increasingly present in university life, companies still do not know how to determine the value of these experiences. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of studying this phenomenon and bringing information that allows these barriers to break, after all, society increasingly needs new solutions to social problems.

Keywords:
Social Business; Career Anchors; University Students

RESUMO

Objetivo:

o objetivo deste trabalho é analisar as âncoras de carreira (Schein, 1974) de estudantes universitários com envolvimento em atividades sociais.

Design/metodologia/abordagem:

optou-se por uma abordagem quantitativa descritiva, com a aplicação de um questionário a 68 jovens participantes do programa de embaixadores CHOICE.

Resultados:

a âncora de serviço e dedicação a uma causa foi predominante, sendo a participação em entidades estudantis e voluntariado foi um aspecto marcante. A âncora de carreira atua como um fator influenciador para o interesse por negócios sociais, enquanto o envolvimento prévio em outras atividades sociais (voluntariado e entidades estudantis) parece ser o indicador que demonstra o quanto o indivíduo irá efetivamente se movimentar na direção dos negócios sociais.

Originalidade/valor:

o resultado demonstra o alinhamento existente entre a procura por um propósito e a atuação em negócios sociais. Embora o envolvimento com atividades sociais esteja se tornando cada vez mais presente na vida universitária, as empresas ainda não sabem determinar o valor dessas experiências. Destaca-se, portanto, a importância de se estudar esse fenômeno e trazer informações que permitam que essas barreiras se quebrem, afinal, cada vez mais a sociedade precisa de novas soluções para os problemas sociais.

Palavras-chave:
Negócios Sociais; Âncoras de Carreira; Estudantes Universitários

1 INTRODUCTION

The development of a society is usually measured by economic indicators that do not always reflect the reality of its social and environmental aspects. Although Brazilian social indicators have shown a marked improvement in recent years, poverty is still a relevant issue in both society and academia. As mentioned by Fischer and Comini (2012), the distribution of financial aid is not sufficient to solve these problems, since the heart of the problem lies in limiting the access of millions of people to their “civil rights”, that is, the restriction of personal freedom due to a variety of conditioning factors.

Faced with such a challenge and in the search for solutions to this reality, some players in society began to mobilize themselves to find alternatives that would bring positive results for both the economic and social aspects. As a result, hybrid organizations, such as social businesses, have emerged in the market.

Social businesses are organizations that fundamentally seek to improve the living conditions of the population with greater social vulnerability through market mechanisms (Barki, Rodrigues & Comini, 2020). The means by which they promote these improvements can be varied and the origin of such a venture may be either the cultural transformation in large corporations, startups created with the intention of generating socio-environmental value or also by civil society organizations that decide to create business units (Comini, Barki, & Aguiar, 2012). Although the origins of organizations may be diverse, there is an essential figure that catalyzes the development of these institutions: the social entrepreneur.

In this context, Dees (2001) suggests that, for the social entrepreneur, the mission is explicit and central; that is, the generation of wealth is an indirect result of the search for impact related to its purpose, to its mission. Thus, social entrepreneurs operate in an emerging field that can be called “responsible career”, as they seek to contribute to societal challenges, such as environmental sustainability and social justice (D´Amario & Comini, 2020; Tams & Marshall, 2011). Their career choice can be connected with a strong sense of purpose and with the Protean career model, in which career choices are guided by individual values, since the definition of success is internal and subjective (Briscoe, Hall, & Frautschy DeMuth, 2006; Hall & Chandler, 2005). As a way of guiding individuals in their career decisions, it built an instrument that makes it possible to understand personal preferences through the career anchor. This concept seeks to translate, in simplified terms, the links between the individual’s motives, needs and aspirations regarding their occupation in the market.

Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the career anchors (Schein, 1974) of university students involved in social activities. In order to achieve the main objective, the following specific objectives were established:

• Identify the distribution of career anchors of young people involved in social activities.

• Assess the level of involvement of young people in social activities in terms of professional alignment and engagement in other activities.

To achieve these objectives, the next topic presents the theoretical framework of the research, organized into two topics: (1) career, including the career concept, new paradigms and career anchors, and (2) social business, which addresses the concept of social entrepreneurship and the profile of the social entrepreneur.

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Career

For being a topic discussed from different perspectives, it is natural that there is a divergence in relation to the concept of career. Hall (2002) understands the dynamics of the concept and states that the term career suffers from surplus meaning, allowing its application in different contexts. The author points out four distinct meanings for the term:

• Career as advancement, in which mobility is vertical in the organization’s hierarchy, through promotions and other upward moves.

• Career as profession: considers as career only those resulting from specific professions that provide progressive moves, offering status to the individual.

• Career as a lifelong sequence of jobs: this concept considers that the individual’s career is his/her work history throughout life, regardless of the type of occupation or activity.

• Career as a lifelong sequence of role-related experiences: the way the person experiences the sequence of jobs and activities that constitute their work history.

In order to contemplate the objective and subjective aspects of an individual’s career and the perception of career as a process that lasts a lifetime, Hall (2002, p. 12) defines career as the “individually perceived sequence of attitudes and behaviors associated with work-related experiences and activities over the span of the person’s life.”

2.1.1 New Career Paradigms

According to Hall (1986apudDutra, 1996), the arrival of baby-boomers in intermediate positions in the companies, the influence of couples who made a career together and the disillusionment of professionals born in the 50s due to the scarce opportunities for growth made the individuals to start looking for new ways of thinking about their careers.

Arthur (1994) understands this relationship between the social context and the individual’s view of career and reports the emergence of the concept of boundaryless careers. The author emphasizes the notion that a position independent of traditional organizational principles is emerging and an increasingly unpredictable and market-sensitive context is bringing profound changes to the way society understands a career. Boundaryless careers involve the possibility of having job opportunities that go beyond the limits of unique work environments (Defillippi & Arthur, 1994).

This redefinition is accompanied by an increase in the diversification of professional opportunities, the increasing dissemination of the idea that people are able to influence their own careers and the social appreciation of continuous growth, mobility, flexibility and notoriety (Dutra, 1996). The perspective of interorganizational mobility is emphasized as a relevant attribute for the success of boundaryless careers (Arthur, Khapova, & Wilderom, 2005), both in the movement among employers, as well as in the search for opportunities.

All these changes are in line with the changes in the contracts in society. In this new perspective, individuals are migrating to the search for what they consider successful according to their values, visions and aspirations (Hall, 2002). Thus, Hall (2002)characterizes the Protean career as the change of the contract, which is with the self and one’s work rather than the self with an organization. This change is described by Herb Shepard (1984 apud Hall, 2002) as choosing the path with heart. The author describes this notion assuming that an individual’s success is determined in relation to the individual’s unique vision and core values in life, that is, the so-called psychological success.

The Protean career presupposes individuals who use their own values to guide their careers and not the organizational values, thus assuming an independent role in this regard (Briscoe et al., 2006). Mobility and learning orientation are also characteristic of Protean individuals, however, as highlighted by the authors, they are not essential components. Consistent with the Protean career view, Schein’s (1974)career anchor model is presented below.

2.1.2 Career Anchors

In 1961, Schein (1974) started a study that sought to determine the influences that socialization in organizations would have on people’s values over time. His universe of study comprised 44 former students of the Sloan School of Management who would be analyzed shortly after graduation and at various times throughout their careers. There were several data collections, but the last one, carried out around 1973-74, revealed the most unexpected results, different from the original objectives of the study.

Schein (1974)identified that there were internal factors or values that guided or stopped these people’s decisions and careers. These career anchors are associated with the personal reasons, needs and aspirations that an individual seeks to satisfy when seeking an occupation in the market. For being related to the stable part of the personality, they are intended to guide the person towards activities that meet basic needs according to their preferences. Eight different career anchors, according to the author, would be sufficient to describe the main aspects involved in the decision-making process of any individual (Schein, 1993). They are:

• Technical and Functional Competence: related to motivation and preference for a type of work, in which satisfaction is associated with the exercise of talents and the notion of being experts in their role. People anchored here develop a sense of identity with their work and must have challenging tasks focused on their area of expertise.

• General Managerial Competence: related to the aspiration to advance in the corporate hierarchy through the development of certain basic skills such as interpersonal skills (influencing, leading or controlling people), analytical skills (identification and solution of conceptual problems) and emotional stability (ability to support a high level of responsibility and feeling stimulated in crisis situations).

• Autonomy and Independence: related to the individual’s need to develop their own professional identity, in which the results are related to the efforts undertaken by the individual; its characteristics are similar to the Creativity anchor, however, they are more focused on maintaining their pace, their priorities and their work habits.

• Security and Stability: individuals who seek security, good career prospects and good long-term benefits in companies; also characterized by the subject’s acceptance of the conditions and definitions imposed by organizations.

• Entrepreneurial Creativity: people who seek to carry out activities or create products and services that are an extension of the subject; they resemble the profile of entrepreneurs and tend to understand the accumulation of assets as the measure of their success.

• Service or Dedication to a Cause: associated with the desire to influence the world towards a certain path; their loyalty is determined according to their personal values.

• Pure Challenge: associated with the perception of high risk in the task; subjects under the influence of this anchor seek to overcome insurmountable obstacles, impossible tasks or to defeat invincible opponents, their motivation is associated with the constant presence of such stimuli.

• Lifestyle: people looking for a deep integration between their work and their individual and family needs, as well as flexibility and understanding when choosing a career.

Considering the relevance of identifying the subject’s intrinsic motivations for career decision-making, the approach proposed by Schein (1974) was chosen to describe the profile of university students involved in social business (topic presented below).

2.2 Social Business

2.2.1 Social enterprises

In order to contextualize social business, it is relevant to talk about the concept of social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial activities aimed at achieving a social purpose have grown in recent years. Innovative solutions, in addition to those related to the third sector, are increasingly present in everyday life (D´Amario & Comini, 2020).

Although social enterprises have established themselves as a prominent global dynamic due to their ability to deal with some contemporary social problems in an innovative way, the limitation of current theories about these organizations requires the application of new theoretical models able to correctly describe the economic and social dimensions to which they are subjugated (Barki, Rodrigues & Comini, 2020).

The assessment of these social enterprises begins with the description of two conditions, represented by financial sustainability and the satisfaction of needs. Given the possibility to combine these two spheres in different ways, there is a continuum on which organizations can be allocated (Battilana & Lee, 2014; Borgaza et al., 2012). Figure 1 shows, on the one hand, traditional organizations that seek to maximize financial results, providing products and services that meet the needs of those who can obtain them. On the other hand, organizations that seek to meet the needs of the general public and are restricted by economic and financial balance. In the central part of this continuum there are different organizational models, such as social enterprises, which seek to balance objectives and restrictions in order to produce an innovative solution for the needs of society.

Figure 1
Organizational Objectives and Satisfaction of Needs

It is possible to find three main currents that explain social business in the literature. The European perspective, born from the tradition of social economy (associations and cooperatives), emphasizes the role of civil society organizations with public functions. The North American perspective, for which these businesses are private organizations with a market logic dedicated to solving socio-environmental problems. The third perspective, predominant in developing countries, considers social businesses as socio-environmental enterprises that operate in the market logic and that aim at reducing poverty and transforming the social conditions that marginalize or exclude people (Comini et al., 2012).

Yunus (2007) states that a social business is different from a charity or an NGO. Like traditional profit-maximizing companies, the social business has owners, who are authorized to recover their investments. These can be a single individual, a partnership, one or more investors who hire managers to operate the business, or even the government or philanthropists or any combination with different types of businesses. Even with different business formats, the social entrepreneur plays a key role.

2.2.3 Social Entrepreneur

The scope of the concept of entrepreneurship allows its social function to be performed in different spheres of society, that is, what defines the entrepreneurial attitude are the skills and abilities of the individual and not the place or modus operandi (Fischer & Comini , 2012). What distinguishes social entrepreneurs from common entrepreneurs is their vision and commitment to social impact. For the social entrepreneur, financial resources are the means to achieve social impact (Dees, 2001; Nicholls & Collavo, 2019). The social mission is explicit and central, so that the decision-making process of such entrepreneurs is influenced by their social vision.

Zahra, Gedajlovic, Neubaum, & Shulman (2009) propose three types of social entrepreneurs according to their approach on how and which problems to solve. According to the authors, entrepreneurs are divided into: Social Bricoleur, those who focus on addressing small-scale local problems; Social Constructionist, which develops reforms and innovations for market failures; and Social Engineer, who seeks to develop a structured solution to systemic social problems. Regardless of the classification of this individual, the need to develop an activity that changes reality is clear and well defined.

Bargsted et al (2013) relate this purpose to the individual’s own aspirations. According to them, the relationship between social entrepreneurship and the social entrepreneurs’ own career allows them to meet their personal needs through their work. In this sense, Schein’s career anchor model (1974) can be used to analyze individuals who would benefit from this relationship between performance in the field of social business and the satisfaction of personal aspirations.

Corroborating the discussion on the factors that influence the social entrepreneur’s career decisions, Tran and Korflesch (2016) discuss factors that influence the intention to act in social entrepreneurship: social entrepreneurial self-efficacy, social entrepreneurial outcome expectations, personality traits and contextual factors. Contributing to the discussion with an empirical research, Chengalvala and Rentala (2017)identified a positive relationship of five factors (social entrepreneurial interest, entrepreneurial attitude, proactive personality, entrepreneurship education and perceived behavioral control) with the intention of choosing a career in social entrepreneurship, through a questionnaire applied to 150 university students in India. The authors also identified factors that limit social entrepreneurship intentions: fear of risk, lack of financial and moral support and lack of knowledge about social entrepreneurship.

Having presented the relevant literature for the present research, the methodological procedures are described below.

3 METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES

Considering the objective of analyzing the career anchors of university students involved in social activities, the quantitative approach was chosen for this research, which allows for the measurement and quantification of data and evidence collected, adopting statistical techniques and methods for analysis and interpretation (Martins & Theóphilo, 2009). Using the survey research method, a descriptive study was conducted based on the collection of data on career anchors, extracurricular activities and sociodemographic data of university students, participants in a program aimed at promoting social impact businesses. Descriptive studies “have the basic objective of describing the characteristics of population and phenomena” (Gil, 2002, p. 131).

To this end, a questionnaire organized in three blocks was structured. The first (block I) consisted of the application of the Career Anchors instrument. As proposed by Schein (1993), block I included 40 statements to be answered using a 6-point Likert scale, where 1 corresponds to “Never true for me” and 6 corresponds to “Always true for me”. After classifying all the statements, the respondents chose, among the best scored items, the three items with which they most identified. Considering the scores given to each of the statements, it was possible to determine the career anchor of each respondent.

The second (block II) contemplated the involvement in social businesses through three closed-ended questions, regarding the performance of the respondents in the researched program and the professional occupation and social activities performed before and after the participation in the program. In relation to the professional occupation, we used four statements that indicated the alignment of the professional activity performed before and after the participation in the program. Three open-ended questions were also included to understand the participants’ engagement in other activities related to Social Business and identify the number of workshops and presentations held.

The third block (block III) aimed at collecting sociodemographic information from the respondents: age, gender, undergraduate course, university and region where they study or studied, current semester or year of graduation.

The identification of young people engaged in social activities was made possible through the contact established with the CHOICE ambassador program. Created in 2011 by the non-governmental organization Artemisia¹, the program consists of a network of young people engaged in disseminating the concept of Social Impact Business in Brazil. In 2016, the program had more than 700 ambassadors spread across 23 states in Brazil, totaling more than 72,000 participants. The participants go through a selection process and a training program in social business, in addition to attending, during a period of 4 months, activities related to awareness and dissemination through presentations and dynamics of the concepts on social business at the universities where they study and other places.

The questionnaire was disseminated through the network of contacts of ambassadors and former ambassadors of the program and through social networks, seeking to reach participants of any of the editions of the program, from 2011 to the first semester of 2016. The sample consisted of 71 respondents, 68 of which were considered valid according to the criteria established to meet the research requirements.

The analysis was based on the research objectives and the nature of the data collected. To determine the results of the Career Anchors instrument (block I), we used the calculation method created by Schein (1974). Then, we proceeded with the study of the frequency of each anchor to then describe the averages, medians and quartiles (Sampieri et al., 2006) individually to the most relevant anchors. Data analysis of block II on social business involvement was divided into two stages: adequacy of data according to the appropriate qualitative analysis methods and subsequent application of one-dimensional descriptive methods.

The question that investigated the respondent’s attitude towards social business was constructed so that each statement reflected a degree of alignment with social business. Table 1 summarizes the statements and the values assigned to each one of them.

Table 1
Classification score regarding the alignment with Social Business

Description	Score
Already worked in a social business (either as an entrepreneur or employee)	3
Was already interested in social business, but did not work in the sector	2
Did not know the concept of Social Business	1
Was not interested in the Social Entrepreneurship sector/Was looking for other areas	0

• Source: prepared by the authors.

As it is an open-ended question, the question about engagement in other social activities brought, in most of the responses, mentions of entities or projects that the respondents were part of. We identified that the use of categories would be the ideal way to substantiate the enumeration process. This treatment made it possible to compare the results of block II in relation to the frequency of the categories and the diversity found in the responses.

As for block III, in which the sociodemographic data was collected, we decided to apply one-dimensional statistical methods related to the absolute and relative frequency that would facilitate the description of the sample profile. Next, the results of the sample profile, the distribution of career anchors and the involvement in social business are analyzed.

4 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

4.1 Sample profile

By analyzing the sociodemographic characteristics, it is possible to see a balance in relation to the respondents’ gender (51.5% male and 48.5% female). With regard to age, a concentration in the age group of 20 to 25 years (72.1%), up to 20 years (7.3%) and the remainder older than 25 years (20.6%). In terms of geographic distribution, there is a greater concentration of respondents in the Southeast region of Brazil (54.4%), followed by the Northeast (23.5%), South (10.3%), and the Midwest (7.4%) and 4.4% unanswered. Finally, in relation to the level of education, 64.7% of respondents were attending higher education and 35.3% have already graduated.

4.2 Distribution of Career Anchors

Considering the data collected in the first section of the research, it was possible to map the career anchors of all participants of the study. Graph 1 shows the incidence of each of the career anchors for the 68 respondents.

Graph 1
Incidence of Career Anchors

Among the 68 respondents, more than half (39) obtained Service and Dedication to a Cause as the main career anchor, followed by Autonomy and Independence (10) and Lifestyle (9). Given the social aspect intrinsic to social business, the result shows that most participants in the CHOICE program have a personal alignment with activities and work environments that have a social component involved.

While large part has a social bias, there is a subgroup that is more in line with other aspects of entrepreneurship. The presence of the Autonomy and Independence and Lifestyle anchors suggests the existence of a portion of the group of respondents with an alignment focused on aspects of the perception of freedom, a sense of dominance over their own destiny. This result is also very much in line with a “boundaryless” career attitude, in which it is possible to establish work relationships beyond the limits of the organization (Briscoe et al., 2006).

It is worth noting the absence of participants with Managerial Competence and Security and Stability as a career anchor. These anchors are commonly associated with professional positions or aspirations found in traditional institutions, both in the private and public spheres. Bearing in mind that social businesses are a derivation of social entrepreneurship, in which a risk-prone profile is important, it can be inferred that aspects related to uncertainty and entrepreneurial risk, whether it is a social business or any other, inhibit people with a more conservative profile.

In order to understand how influential each of the main career anchors is in the decision-making process of the individuals studied, a box-plot was built to describe the distribution of the results obtained in the questionnaire. Overall, results may vary from 0 to 8.4 points and there is no minimum score that would characterize the influence of a certain anchor in the individual’s decision-making process. Thus, Graph 2 shows the distribution of the main anchors according to the results obtained. We chose not to place the other anchors due to the absence or low impact on the results.

The Lifestyle anchor indicates a more uniform sample in relation to the average of the responses, being the one with the lowest range among the main responses (2 points). As for Autonomy and Independence and Service and Dedication to a Cause, the scope was greater. The difference was 2.4 points for AI and 3.2 for SD.

Graph 2
Box-Plot of the Incidence of the Main Anchors

In relation to the median, AI and SD show similar behavior. Autonomy and Independence obtained 6.2 points of average and 6.4 points of median while Service and Dedication to a Cause indicated 6.9 points of average and 6.8 points of median. Maxima and minimums have some differences. While the minimum of the three main anchors are very close to each other, (AI: 5.2; SD: 5.2; LS: 5.4) the maximum of the Service and Dedication to a Cause anchor showed a difference in relation to the other two. Reaching 8.5 points, the maximum of this anchor was 2 points higher in relation to LS and 1.8 in relation to AI. To complement the understanding of the results of career anchors, we will then analyze the respondents’ involvement in social business.

4.3 Involvement in Social Business

The first question of block II sought to understand the number of workshops and/or presentations applied during the participation in the program. For this, we chose an open-ended question where respondents should inform how many events they have held. In order to facilitate data interpretation, we decided to distribute the answers in ranges according to the numbers informed in the questionnaire. Table 2 shows the result of this process. Approximately two-thirds of respondents (61.77%) reported having held up to fifteen events during the period in which they participated in the program. In terms of number of events expected by the organizers of the CHOICE program, most respondents (69.13%) considerably exceeded the minimum requirement to hold two presentations or workshops during the student’s participation period. This shows that young people have effectively engaged and stimulated themselves with the subject.

Table 2
Number of Workshops and/or Presentations Applied

Range by # of WS applied	Absolute Frequency	Relative Frequency
0 - 5	13	19.12%
6 - 10	13	19.12%
11 - 15	16	23.53%
16 - 20	9	13.24%
20 +	9	13.24%
Do not remember	8	11.76%
Total	68	100.00%

• Source: prepared by the authors.

The analysis of the respondent’s professional alignment in relation to Social Business considered the distribution of the affinity score shown in Table 1. The results (Table 3) indicate that, among the respondents, 44% declared they had no knowledge about social business and another 50% declared to be interested in the sector, but without working professionally in it. Although it is a topic that has been increasingly discussed in depth in universities, the significant percentage of people who declared that they do not have knowledge about social business suggests that there is still room to deepen the discussions on the subject.

It was possible to see the visibility that Social Business has acquired over the past years, since half of the participants declared to know the concept of Social Business. However, 44% said they did not know the concept, while only 2 students declared to work professionally in a social business. These figures show that, although the subject is becoming increasingly relevant, it is still a professional segment that is not very explored. Rosolen (2014) precisely points out this trend in her study: one third of the participants showed interest in social business but did not consider a professional change to this segment in the short term.

Table 3
Social Business Affinity Score

Affinity score	Absolute Frequency	Relative Frequency
3 - Already worked in a social business (either as an entrepreneur or employee)	2	2.94%
2- Was already interested in social business, but did not work in the sector	34	50.00%
1- Did not know the concept of Social Business	30	44.12%
0- Was not interested in the Social Entrepreneurship sector/Was looking for other areas	2	2.94%
Total	68	100.00%

• Source: prepared by the authors.

It is also worth noting that a small part of the people who know about the subject effectively work in the sector, either as an entrepreneur or as an employee of a social business, representing only 2.94% of the sample of this study. Even though the concept is gaining relevance in university discussions, students are not migrating to this area of expertise. One possible explanation would be the still incipient number of organizations that recognize themselves as a social business². In most cases, they are lean structures that absorb little workforce. In a survey conducted by Rosolen (2014) with university students in the administration course, it was evidenced that more than a third of the respondents of her research showed intention to work in social businesses in the medium/long term, but that in the short term they would focus on companies that enable faster professional development.

The third part of block II covered the social activities in which the respondents were involved. Following the categorization criteria, Table 4 summarizes which categories of activities the participants engaged in before the CHOICE Ambassadors program. For allowing the respondent to indicate more than one activity, there is an overlap of some of the categories in terms of absolute frequency. According to the results, almost half of the respondents (47.06%) had been involved with student bodies at their universities, while just over a third (35.29%) participated in voluntary activities. The high rates of participation in other activities are in line with the premises of the CHOICE program, since students should exemplify their insertion in extracurricular activities, with a high level of engagement expected.

Table 4
Incidence by category of social activity practiced

Category of Activities	Absolute Frequency	Relative Frequency
Student Unions	32	47.06%
Volunteering	24	35.29%
Academic Research	2	2.94%
Internship	2	2.94%
Religious Activities	1	1.47%
None/Not informed	16	23.53%

• Source: prepared by the authors.

Contrary to the previous result, it is worth noting the expressive number of participants who did not inform or declared not to participate in any other activity before applying to the program. The existence of this group of people suggests a change in the recruitment process, which may have changed its selection criteria.

4.4 Career Anchors by Level of Involvement in Social Activities

In this third part of the analysis of the results, the objective is to cross the data presented in the other two sessions by proposing a panel that describes the relationship between involvement in subjects related to social business and the profile assigned by the career anchor of the respondents. In terms of the total incidence of each career anchor by alignment score, the intersection can be summarized according to Graph 3.

Score number 3 represents those who worked in social businesses, whether as an entrepreneur or employee. We found that there was only one representative from the Service and Dedication to a Cause anchor and one representative from the Lifestyle anchor. The presence of these two specific anchors, despite the low incidence, is in line with the data presented on the general distribution of the anchors according to the sample.

Score number 2 represents those who knew the concepts of social business, but did not work in the sector, the level of involvement that had the highest incidence. Representing more than half of the results (19), the Service and Dedication to a Cause anchor stands out as the predominant profile. Regarding the other anchors, AI showed approximately one third (6) of the incidence of SD, while LS only one sixth (3).

Graph 3
Incidence of Career Anchors by Alignment Score

Score number 1 represents participants who did not know the concepts of social business before participating in the CHOICE Ambassador program. At this level of involvement, we found a distribution similar to alignment score number 2. More than half (19) indicated SD as a career anchor, while 5 indicated LS and 4, AI.

Finally, score number 0 represents those who had no interest in social business. The exclusivity of the Technical or Functional Competence anchor in this score can be explained by the very nature of the profile. The identification of the individual takes place with the work itself and their area of expertise and not necessarily with a purpose, as with the SD anchor.

In order to deepen the understanding about the characteristics of the prominent groups, scores 1 and 2, and possibly identify groups of interest, the social activities practiced by the respondents were added to the panel represented by Graph 3. The result of this analysis can be seen in Graph 4. It can be seen that alignment score 2 indicates an interest group composed of those who have been involved with Volunteering or Student Unions or both and indicate SD or AI as career anchors. Corresponding to approximately two thirds of the respondents of alignment score 2, this group has a strong alignment with two of the most important aspects of social entrepreneurship and, consequently, of social business: the connection with a purpose (SD anchor) and the entrepreneur’s autonomy (AI anchor).

Graph 4
Incidence of Career Anchors by Alignment Score and Social Activities Practiced

As for alignment score 1, two groups are evident. Involvement in Volunteering or Student Unions or both at the same time and the SD anchor form the largest interest group at this level of involvement. Representing just over a third of the respondents, the exclusivity of the SD anchor confirms the direct relationship between this profile and the search for social business. With just over a third of the answers related to this score, the second group corresponds to those who did not inform or did not practice social activities. Even with a greater variety of anchors, this group, interestingly, has a high incidence of SD. There is a certain convergence of people’s profile regardless of the engagement in other activities. This result is corroborated by the presence of the main anchors, SD, AI and LS, in virtually all classes of social activities.

5 FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The main purpose of this study was to analyze the career anchors (Schein, 1974) of university students involved in social activities. The research involved university students who participated in the CHOICE ambassador program.

The analysis of data from the Career Anchors instrument with those referring to the involvement in social business (professional aspect and extracurricular activities) evidenced the existence of three interest groups. Students who have Service and Dedication to a Cause or Autonomy and Independence as career anchors and worked in Student Unions or in Volunteering represent the largest group among those who already knew the concepts of social business, but did not work in the sector. As for respondents who had no prior knowledge of social business, it was found that there was a group composed of those who have Service and Dedication to a Cause as a career anchor and worked in Student Unions or Volunteering, in addition to another group composed of representatives of several anchors, but who did not declare or work in any other extracurricular activity.

It is noted that the career anchor acts as a factor of influence for the interest in social business, while previous involvement in other social activities (volunteering and student unions) seems to be the indicator that shows how much the individual will effectively move in the direction of social business. The predominance of the Service and Dedication to a Cause anchor and the great involvement of students with Student Unions and Volunteering are in line with Hall’s proposal (2002) for the Protean career. The involvement in various activities in search of their personal values seems to be the indication that the researched students show.

Although the involvement in social activities is becoming increasingly present in university life, companies still do not know how to determine the value of these experiences. Because it is a characteristic that is very present in younger people, people of other generations may have difficulty understanding the motivations of these students. Owning your own company, especially one that applies an unusual model such as that of social impact business, may seem quite strange to those more accustomed to traditional models of organizations.

Therefore, we emphasize the importance of studying this phenomenon and bringing information that allows these barriers to break, after all, society increasingly needs new solutions to social problems.

This research has limitations resulting from the research design. Due to the non-probabilistic sampling procedure, the results shown here are restricted to describing the profile of the respondents, making any generalization unfeasible. As other limitations, it is possible to mention: the use of the self-completed questionnaire, which may generate bias from the respondent in reporting the information and the study’s restriction, since the respondents’ perception was raised in only one moment in time.

As future research, we suggest longitudinal studies (to assess changes in variables over time), with a qualitative approach, in addition to the study with young people who are not participating in a social program for comparison purposes.

REFERENCES

• Arthur, M. B; Khapova, S. N; & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2005). Career success in a boundaryless career world. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2), 177-202. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.290
• Barki, E; Rodrigues, J; Comini, G. (2020). Um conceito em construção. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas Empresas , v.9,.no.4, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14211/regepe.v9i4.1980
• Battilana, J; & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing - Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises The Academy of Management Annals, v. 8, n. 1, p. 397-441.
• Borgaza, C; Depredi, S; & Galera, G. (2012). Interpreting social enterprises. Revista de Administração, 47(3), 398-409. https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1046
• Briscoe, J. P; Hall, D. T; & Frautschy DeMuth, R. L. (2006). Protean and boundaryless careers: An empirical exploration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69(1), 30-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.09.003
• Chengalvala, S; & Rentala, S. (2017). Intentions towards social entrepreneurship among univeristy students in India. Internationa Journal of Research - Granthaalayah, 5(6), 406-412.
• Comini, G; Barki, E; & Aguiar, L. T. de.(2012). A three-pronged approach to social business: a Brazilian multi-case analysis social businesses. Revista de Administração, 47(3), 385-397. https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1045
  » https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1045
• D’Amario, E. Q.; & Comini, G. M. (2020). Social Innovation in Brazilian Social Entrepreneurships: A proposed scale for its classification RGBN Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, v.22, n.01. https://rbgn.fecap.br/RBGN/article/view/4037
  » https://rbgn.fecap.br/RBGN/article/view/4037
• Defillippi, R. J; & Arthur, M. B. (1994). The Boundaryless Career: A Competency-Based Perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(4), 307-324. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2488429
  » http://www.jstor.org/stable/2488429
• Dutra, J. S. (1996). Administração de Carreiras: uma proposta para repensar a gestão de pessoas (1a ed.). Editora Atlas S.A.
• Fischer, R. M; & Comini, G. M. (2012). Sustainable development: from responsibility to entrepreneurship. Revista de Administração, 47(3), 363-369. https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1044
  » https://doi.org/10.5700/rausp1044
• Gil, A. C. (2002). Como elaborar projetos de pesauisa (4 .ed.). São Paulo: Atlas.
• Hall, D. T. (2002). Careers In and Out of Organizations London: SAGE Publications, Inc.
• Hall, D. T; & Chandler, D. E. (2005). Psychological success: When the career is a calling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2), 155-176. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.301
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/job.301
• Martins, G. de A; & Theóphilo, C. R. (2009). Metodologia da investigação científica para ciências sociais aplicadas São Paulo: Atlas .
• Nicholls, A; & Collavo, T. (2019).The concept of social entrepreneurship In: Atlas of Social Innovation, 2019.
• Rosolen, T. (2014). Negócios sociais e valores pessoais: um estudo quantitativo com estudantes de Administração. 118p. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Faculdade de Economia, Administração e Contabilidade, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
• Sampieri, R. H; Collado, C. F; Lucio, M. D. P. B; Garcia, A. G. Q; Júlio, M; & Silva, D. da. (2006). Metodologia de Pesquisa(3a ed.). São Paulo -SP: McGraw-Hill.
• Schein, E. H. (1974). Career Anchors and Career Paths: A Panel Study of Management School Graduates (Technical Report) Organizational Studies Group
• Schein, E. H. (1993). Career anchors: discovering your real values Amsterdam ; San Diego : Pfeiffer & Co.
• Tams, S; & Marshall, J. (2011). Responsible careers: Systemic reflexivity in shifting landscapes. Human Relations, 64(1), 109-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726710384292
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726710384292
• Tran, A. T. P; & Korflesch, H. V. (2016). A conceptual model of social entrepreneurial intention based on the social cognitive career theory. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 17-38.
• Yunus, M. (2007). Creating a world without poverty: social business and the future of capitalism New York: PublicAffairs.
• 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, 519-532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.007
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.007

• 1
  Artemisia was founded in 2004 and is considered the first accelerator of social business in Brazil.
• 2
  In 2017, Pipe, a for-profit organization focused on prospecting and promoting impactful businesses, presented a study that indicates the existence of 579 social businesses. For more details, please visit https://www.pipe.social/mapa2017

• Copyrights - ReA/UFSM owns the copyright to this content.
• Plagiarism Check - The ReA/UFSM maintains the practice of submitting all documents approved for publication to the plagiarism check, using specific tools, e.g.: CopySpider

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  16 July 2021
• Date of issue
  Apr-Jun 2021

History

• Received
  21 Dec 2017
• Accepted
  29 July 2020