Keywords

1 Introduction

New ideas and new efforts are crucial ways of bringing about development. The most exciting aspect of social entrepreneurship is that it does not concern itself only with innovation; it has to achieve this fundamental objective through social change. Social enterprises are boosting social welfare services (Milligan and Fyfe 2004). It is supported that social enterprises can empower the communities and improve the social, economic, and environmental conditions (DTI 2002, 2006; Social Enterprise UK 2011). Leading social enterprises are located in rural areas (Harding 2006). However, rural social enterprises are under-researched (Muñoz 2011) and limited records available within this theme (Clark et al. 2007; Zografos 2007). The research papers concerning rural communities are focused on addressing charities, voluntary organisations, and local community initiatives (Fyfe 2005; Randle and Dolnicar 2009). There are several reasons for the success of community productions. For example, rural communities render by the shared traditional rural strength incorporating mutual knowledge, a sense of community, and social cohesion (Shucksmith et al. 1996). Social enterprises create sustainable and entrepreneurial rural communities (Steinerowski and Steinerowska-Streb 2012). Social enterprises are known as community development actors (Eversole et al. 2013; Smith and McColl 2016), serving as the new provider of public services or act as social actors to innovate to support their agenda (Zografos 2007). The cultural characteristics of indigenous communities are conducive for social enterprises (Giovannini 2012). They cater social well-being of the local community through its social purpose (Perez 2013; Thompson and Doherty 2006).

India has a robust and rapidly growing economy, with a gross domestic product (GDP) of $2.9 trillion, which places India as the fifth with the largest economy, compared to $2.7 trillion and $2.6 trillion (UN 2017). Furthermore, in terms of population, India has 1.34 billion people, which ranks India as the second country with the highest population in the world. It is also estimated that India’s entrepreneurship or small business sector contributes over 1.3 million employment opportunities annually, making entrepreneurship the second largest sector only after agriculture by contributing to the economy. Similarly, the number of small businesses or entrepreneurs in India is about 48 million compared to that of the United States (23 million) (Arora and Singh 2020). In their summary, Prahlad (2008) and Swetha and Rao (2013) stated that the history of small businesses, such as entrepreneur development, dates back to the Valley Civilization (3200–2600 BCE). It was followed by massive growth and a modernisation period for entrepreneurship, which was driven by WWII experiences. It reflected a period of massive needs for goods and services. In between these periods was the experience of the colonial era, which was similarly remarkable. After that, the post-independent period also experienced a large-scale entrepreneurship advancement, which continued until this contemporary time.

The entrepreneurship development in the region of Jharkhand in India also is part of this experience. Local people, including women and indigenous people, are part of this history. Their brave, creative, and innovative efforts were geared toward overcoming the social barriers and challenges of unemployment, low income or lack of income, poverty, and inequality. Therefore, there was a need to explore new ways of survival, so innovation became the vogue, which enables them to explore and exploit opportunities. This study shows that India’s development would be more balanced and even more successful when the role of social entrepreneurs in women empowerment and rural community development entrepreneurial opportunities and potentiality across India is maximally explored and exploited. Thus, as Prahlad (2008) argues, policy support for innovation at the grassroots level across India is crucial.

In this study, the authors examine the social entrepreneurial self-efficacy approach in the realisation of women empowerment and rural community development. The aim is to critically examine the phenomenon of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy as it applies in women empowerment and rural community development. The authors discussed the study’s aim and objectives, problem, and the gap and reviewed the relevant extant literature and case analysis to achieve the objective below. After that, the findings were also discussed and interpreted. In conclusion, the study findings were re-enforced in line with the objectives. In the end, suggestions for possible further research opportunities were highlighted.

2 Research Problem and Research Objectives

India is one of the youngest countries globally, with 64% of its population are in the working age group. If most of the most youthful population decides to become social entrepreneurs (Salamzadeh et al. 2013; Lacap et al. 2018), maximum social problems will be resolved. Jharkhand is one of the states of India that has young working populations. Moreover, the Jharkhand state has taken several initiatives with the help of Jharkhand State Khadi and Village Industries Board and Jharkhand Silk, Textile, and Handicraft Development Corporation (Jharcraft) for encouraging entrepreneurship in the state. Hence, there is scope and rationale behind investigating the applicability of social entrepreneurship in the Jharkhand region. The research aims to study the phenomena of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy among handicraft social enterprises. This research problem is premised on the need to enhance the comprehension of the phenomenon of social entrepreneurship as a critical tool for women empowerment and rural community advancement while committing to the following three specific objectives:

  1. 1.

    To critically examine the roles of social entrepreneurship in achieving women empowerment and rural community development.

  2. 2.

    To critically investigate and analyse how these roles are linked to their skills and experiences.

  3. 3.

    To propose a theoretical framework describing the roles of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy given women empowerment and rural community development.

3 Research Gap

Most of the literature available in social entrepreneurship, especially handicraft social entrepreneurship in eastern states of India, came from Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Bihar. Despite several attempts by the state government to improve handicraft entrepreneurship in the Jharkhand, there is still little empirical work. Moreover, despite this critical knowledge-sharing opportunity concerning the research problem, social venture based on reviving the traditional crafts in women empowerment and community development is an under-researched phenomenon. It has led to a gap in comprehension and assimilation of the role social entrepreneurs play in rural development. The research gap, therefore, is driven by addressing the research questions. What is the role of social entrepreneurs in women empowerment and rural community development? Can social entrepreneurs contribute to the further advancement and sustainability of the rural-based handcraftsmanship industry and the artisanship vocational sector? Moreover, would a qualitative approach be applicable and relevant to this particular community-oriented study context (Sayer 1992 as cited in Yin 2009)?

4 Review of Literature on Social Entrepreneurship and Self-Efficacy

The linkage between innovation, creativity, social entrepreneurship, and social entrepreneurship self-efficacy is inevitably close. It is an integral part of the social entrepreneurship process through innovation that brings about new ideas and new product development. Whereas, on the other hand, creativity is more to do with engaging in that specific action of impacting the difference, social entrepreneurship is somewhere in between. There are broadly two categories of social enterprises. The first is categorised as nonprofit organisations (NPOs) that undertake a market-oriented approach (Defourny and Kim 2011). The second is classified as profit-making enterprises that call attention to two aspects: economic sustainability of the social venture and solutions to social problems (Dacin et al. 2011).

Entrepreneurial behaviour is guided by entrepreneurial intentions (Tiwari et al. 2017). There are a few identified social entrepreneurial purposes, i.e. empathy, moral judgement, perceived social support, and social entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Mair and Noboa 2006). Social entrepreneurial self-efficacy is defined as a “person’s belief that individuals can contribute toward solving societal problems” (Hockerts 2017). Higher social entrepreneurial self-efficacy shows that the social entrepreneur is highly motivated and confident in addressing the social issue (Sequeira et al. 2007). Moreover, self-efficacy through the social entrepreneurship process helps entrepreneurs develop the skills that made them different from managers (Chen et al. 1998).

It suggests that in the context of this social entrepreneurship discourse, self-efficacy means that the degree to which a person believes in themselves is fundamentally critical in measuring self-efficacy. To this, Dana (2000), in his study relating to creating entrepreneurship in India, added that even “giving youth (the necessary) self-confidence (in order) to become higher flyers” is a typical example of promoting self-efficacy. Further, Dana (2000) highlighted that factors that could boost self-efficacy might include extending cultural values, diligence, government regulations, provision of relevant resources that people need, and changing the artistic mindset of people regarding entrepreneurship (Dana 2000). It is critical because India is a multicultural society with massive, diverse ethnic nationalities and a considerable population base to identify potential entrepreneurial stars (Dana 2000). As with Dana (ibid), importantly, that is why, as the authors believe, undertaking this study as an opportunity of learning more about how to boost self-efficacy concerning women empowerment and rural community development is crucial.

Similarly, in this present study, as with Dana (2000), giving self-confidence and self-efficacy to women and rural community development could advance India’s global competitiveness through women empowerment and rural community development. In an earlier study, Dana (1999) highlighted the culture preservation through small businesses in Greece. Dana (1999) argues that government support for artisans and craftsmen, removal of task burdens, and reducing bureaucracy were also necessary to enhance self-confidence among aspiring entrepreneurship development at targeted areas: regional development and promoting traditions and crafts overseas. Thus, the authors believe women empowerment and rural development processes may benefit from these lessons. Ultimately, India will gain through support for women entrepreneurs and rural community development.

The handicraft industry not only provides employment opportunities but also revives declining craft practices. The Jharkhand state has an abundance of minerals, metals, and woods. Also, there are famous crafts like terracotta, woodcrafts, jute crafts, tribal jewellery, bamboo crafts, indigenous tribal paintings, Dokra metal casting, and tribal weavings that are the primary livelihood of indigenous communities. Therefore, Jharkhand has become a popular destination for handicraft social entrepreneurs in the past decade which leads to potential sustainable employment opportunities for the local communities of Jharkhand.

Similarly, the grassroots drive to bringing about the potential revival of indigenous art forms such as Paitker painting through innovation in the Jharkhand region of India is no different. It is all about the role of social entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship to achieve women’s empowerment and rural community development. The role of women in indigenous crafts revival has become evident to reap employment benefits along with their exposure in the public domain (Buckley 1998; Attfield and Kirkham 1989). It has motivated the present study. The current research is focused on highlighting the five key roles of social entrepreneurs in addressing the value of self-efficacy for solving social issues like women empowerment and rural community development. It might help trigger the rejuvenation handicraft industrial sector in the Jharkhand region of India, which has been overlooked as a potential tool of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy for many years. It is believed that sharing this new addition is fundamentally a critical contribution to the knowledge of handicraft social enterprises.

More specifically, social entrepreneurs are recognised as crucial players in delivering innovative and cost-effective social business models for resolving social issues and creating social values (Khanapuri and Khandelwal 2011; Zeyen et al. 2012). Moreover, social entrepreneurs focus on economic value and social value creation (Mair and Mart 2006). Self-efficacy is identified as an affecting antecedent in the field of social entrepreneurial research. The high self-efficacy of social entrepreneurs allows perceiving feasible social business models (Mair and Noboa 2006; Mair and Mart 2006). Several entrepreneurship scholars proved that self-efficacy helps to anticipate the opportunities; therefore it is suggested to study the significance of self-efficacy in social entrepreneurship phenomena (Krueger and Brazeal 1994; Mair and Noboa 2006; Mair and Mart 2006; Smith and Woodworth 2012; Hockerts 2010).

It is an underlying fact that the role of women is indispensable in local, national, and global development (Clark 2013). Even though they live in poor rural communities, they have participated in local economies. Their participation has positively fostered the work environment and facilitated them to enjoy a better status in their household and local communities (Coughlin and Thomas 2002). Regarding the context of social entrepreneurship, social enterprises “can sustain the empowerment of the weakest social sectors like indigenous women, who suffer a condition of double discrimination” (Giovannini 2012). It has been observed that patriarchal culture in indigenous communities obstructs women’s empowerment. However, social enterprises have encouraged women’s empowerment by giving them employment opportunities and controlling their income source (Maguirre et al. 2016). As always, the underlying factor that prompted social entrepreneurship is the ability to quest for opportunities to create social values, generate employment, and eradicate poverty and inequalities. Moreover, there is a need that created opportunities for entrepreneurs to innovate new ways of creating an equalitarian society.

This review of extant literature focuses on building on a theoretical framework underpinning this study’s objectives, which aims to recreate the notion of the role of social entrepreneurs as a model. Entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy plays mediating role between social capital and new venture creation (Kannadhasan et al. 2018). Social capital is defined as the extent of the availability of social networks and the quality of resources owned by an entrepreneur (Bourdieu 2011). Social capital is crucial for entrepreneurial phenomena as it facilitates the identification of business opportunities, knowledge acquisition, reputation building, networking, and performance improvement (Lechner and Dowling 2003; Shaw et al. 2008; Zhang et al. 2020). Accordingly, as we would notice, the social capital theory is used to construct the theoretical framework intended to examine the self-efficacy factors of social entrepreneurship in women empowerment and rural community development. The rate of social entrepreneurship indicates the social capital of the country (Perkins et al. 2002; Häuberer 2010; Estrin et al. 2013). A review of literature related to methodological process does highlight the fact that social entrepreneur and entrepreneurship are models that embed several vital characteristics and roles including social leadership (Dees 1998; Borins 2000; Wallace 1999; Cornwall 1998), as an influencer (Hodgson 2007; Oliver 1991), as a motivator, (Holland 1985), as an employer (Zahra et al. 2009), and a network architect (Adler and Kwon 2002; Lee et al. 2001).

5 Methodology

The present study follows a qualitative approach. Although literature relating to a qualitative approach involving social entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy may have been scarce in connection with the handicraft social enterprises, we used the same methodology in this research. It is in reliance on the fact that a qualitative approach has been known to have been a valuable tool in gathering data in a wider rural setting (following Sayer 1992, cited in Yin 2009), on an exploratory basis. The research strategy used is the cross-case analysis between two social entrepreneurial ventures. Given that social entrepreneurship is a widespread phenomenon in social science literature, research on social enterprises has followed case studies (Anderson et al. 2006; Hockerts 2010). Case studies are suitable strategies as research in this subject area is usually impending and mainly in exploratory stages. Therefore, case studies allow generating a large amount of information with the help of in-depth investigation (Bhattacherjee 2012). The case study inquiry relies on collective evidence from various resources (Groenland and Dana 2019). The data collection instruments used in the present study are interviews, focus group discussions, and observation. The study incorporated 24 in-depth interviews, three focus group discussions, and participant observations. Also, field observation was conducted, including photos taken and videos made of the location as a backup.

The primary reason was to encourage deeper comprehension of the phenomenon being researched. The authors seek to understand the phenomenon under study by getting embedded in it and getting close to the participants as close and practically as possible. Previous scholars have successfully adopted similar methodological design preferences in their various qualitative study endeavours (Patton 1982; Dana and Dana 2005). It means this methodological framework has been supported. It is posited that “methodological mandate to be contextually sensitive, inductive, and naturalistic,” which means that researchers must get close to the phenomenon under study (Dana and Dana 2005: 85–86). Earlier scholars also supported this methodology. They argue that in the qualitative methods attempts, they understand the setting under study through direct personal contact through physical proximity for some time and the development of closeness (Patton 1982: 10), also cited by Dana and Dana (2005). However, other scholars previously found in a qualitative study that not only variety of data sources can be relevant (Yin 1981, as also cited by Dana and Dana 2005), but that, significantly, the data are well documented, verifiable, and reliable (Yin 1981), as also cited in Dana and Dana (2005). Accordingly, these data from the present two case studies of Pipal Tree and Maatighar are similarly well documented for further verification and reliability where necessary, which helped enriched the outcome. It means that in this present study, the choice of qualitative design methodology was appropriate, as it has allowed added value to knowledge, which hitherto unnoticed or underutilised. The authors argue that this made a significant contribution to methods because it improved reliability.

The present study is based on two handicraft social enterprises, namely Pipal Tree and Maatighar. The Pipal Tree is engaged with the training of woodcraft skills to facilitate women empowerment and rural development. In comparison, the Maatighar is primarily working towards the revival of the indigenous craft of Jharkhand, namely, Paitker painting. It is one of the oldest indigenous art forms performed by the Chitrakar community of Jharkhand, India. However, the Paitker painting is usually performed by men of the Chitrakar community. However, Maatighar has taken the initiative to endow Paitker’s skill to women to facilitate women’s empowerment and rural indigenous community development. The research population is targeted because both are handicraft social enterprises working towards women empowerment and rural community development over 4 years and share the same social entrepreneurial attributes. So, their experiences and knowledge became relevant during the data collecting field exercise.

The research sample selection is based on the fact that Jharkhand is a forest-covered state of eastern India. The rich tribe culture is synonymous with ancient craft succession in Jharkhand. There are 30 Scheduled Tribes in Jharkhand. The endangered craft forms are still being practised in rural Jharkhand. However, these art forms are on the verge of extinction. However, the state government has come forward to rescue these heritage crafts of Jharkhand by incorporating marketing and retail platforms like Jharcraft and Kusum. Irrespective of government support, handicrafts of Jharkhand are struggling to survive in the market. To overcome such situations, social entrepreneurs who know the economic potential of this sector have come forward to support and sustain the craft culture of Jharkhand.

Utpal Shaw has founded Pipal Tree, which is a for-profit social entrepreneurial venture. It has been established in the year 2014 with a vision to enforce women’s empowerment in the rural setting of Jharkhand. It was all started with the social entrepreneurial thrive of Utpal Shaw, who always wanted to do something for unprivileged and secluded women of the society. He started this venture at Ghatshila with a handful of around three to four women who suffered ostracism in their family and yet wanted to step forward to change their lives. He trained them and encouraged them to pursue woodcrafts as their livelihood. Other women also got inspired and reached out to Pipal Tree to learn woodcraft skills. Each woman artisan of Pipal Tree has an awe-inspiring story to tell. Most of them are single parents and ostracised by family. Few of them could not feed their children, but now they provide food and schooling facilities. Mr. Utpal took pride by quoting that “…these women have made it possible to achieve Pipal Tree whatever it is today.” It has managed to get a decent market in no time. Earlier, we had no retail place. As soon as the craft got popular, we managed to open nine retail shops in the major cities of Jharkhand.

Virendra Kumar has founded Maatighar, a for-profit organisation that is working for the revival of Paitker painting with a vision to hoard the longstanding heritage of Jharkhand. He envisioned providing sustainable livelihood to the Chitrakar community of Jharkhand, known for performing an extinct art form called Paitker painting. It strongly focuses on the empowerment of the Chitrakar community of Jharkhand. Chitrakars or Painters is a community that habitat across the border of West Bengal and Jharkhand. Mr. Virendra Kumar envisioned Maatighar in 2017. He was on an excursion to Amadobi village where he accidentally met Bijoy Chitrakar. This village is also known as Painters’ village because of the Chitrakar community that resides there. Bijoy Chitrakar has shown and narrated his Paitker painting to him. He got curious about the Paitker art and Chitrakar community. Bijoy Chitrakar averred that “...it is difficult to sell Paitker; therefore, Chitrakars have migrated to nearby cities in search of sustainable livelihoods.” After listing the ordeal of Bijoy Chitrakar and exploring the milieu of Chitrakars, he was motivated to help these artisans and revive the Paitker painting. He formed his team and conceived the idea of Maatighar. He knew that the community is suffering from hardship due to a lack of support regarding training, marketing, and promotions. He propelled absconded Chitrakars to resume the Paitker art form. He also included women in the Paitker skill development training to empower women of the rural community. His altruism towards the Chitrakar community has helped them to get a sustainable livelihood. On asking about the Paitker painting, he said:

Paitker painting is a traditional craft form of the Chitrakar community. The painting uses natural colors driven out of flowers, vegetables, and stones. The brush is also made up of natural materials like bamboo and hairs of goat and squirrel.

This research adopted an exploratory design to understudy the phenomenon more deeply through cross-case analysis following Yin (1998, 2003). The authors utilised mix-of-tools, including interviews, focus group discussions, and observation with social entrepreneurs and artisans. In these conversations, for example, authors used the telephone as well as personal interviews. Additionally, the authors took photos of these specially made pieces of handicrafts. Moreover, the authors took a collection of video documentaries.

Meanwhile, authors also attended life workshops and exhibition events. During that time, they made further direct critical observations, using sight and feeling and appreciating how these specially made handicraft materials were being designed and constructed life in action. Additionally, the authors also utilised open-ended questions to gather relevant data from participating social entrepreneurs and artisans during the visits. The questions included social and economic aspects emphasising social entrepreneurial self-efficacy towards women empowerment and rural community development. The empirical work for this study took place between 2016 and 2019. Altogether 24 respondents participated in the personal interview, including social entrepreneurs and women artisans. The authors selected interviewees based on their importance, visibility, expertise, and recommendation. The duration of the personal interview ranges from 45 min to 2 h. The authors conducted observation on the workshops of Pipal Tree and Maatighar collectively for 102 h. The transcript recorded were of 342 pages. Data triangulation is performed with the help of collective data collection instruments to validate information generation. The data was subsequently analysed and the outcome of which led to the formation of the insight.

The cross-case analysis followed the procedure of categorisation, abstraction, and comparison of Pipal Tree and Maatighar as shown below (see Table 1).

Table 1 Comparison of Pipal Tree and Maatighar
Full size table

Since both the handicraft social enterprises are from the same state, each participant’s view is not different from the other. The authors conducted focus group discussions to address the discrepancies that appeared in the personal interview. Data triangulation and informants from Jharcraft (Jharkhand government undertaking handicraft enterprise) contributed to verifying participants’ views.

5.1 Case Analysis

According to Ketokivi and Choi (2014), “the premise in theory-generating case research is that in the context of the specific research question and empirical setting, explanation (theory) derives from exploration (analysis).” We commenced with the identification of themes that have been extracted from the verbatim of the field study. After this, we identified the constructs of the cases by discussing them in-depth. We not only (1) achieved the first objective of the study in this analysis but also (2) processed the transcripts under the perceptions of the social entrepreneurs and converted same as meaningful as they can be, and then (3) the literature documentary evidence was analysed in which the significant findings were modelled as reflected in a framework as exhibited in Fig. 1. The framework exhibited in Fig. 1 is inspired by the study of Kumari (2020), where she explained the five key roles of social entrepreneurs in women empowerment and indigenous community development (Kumari 2020).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Role of the social entrepreneur in women empowerment and rural community development

Full size image

Further, a deeper analysis of the qualitative data was carried out, during which we arrived at an expected outcome based on social entrepreneurs’ perceptions (Stake 2005). These analyses led us to believe the insight that roles of social entrepreneurs are not merely varied but valuable and helpful to a wide range of causes, including improvements in the welfare, wellness, and well-being of artisans as well as entire indigenous and rural communities (Kumari 2020). The cross-case approach led to astute findings that help to comprehend our knowledge and become the basis of the theory-building of this study.

Self-efficacy or trust in the effectiveness of social entrepreneurship ventures has been widely explored in women empowerment, rural community development, and many other fields (Kroeker 1995; Maton and Salem 1995; Perkins 1995; Perkins et al. 1996; Speer and Hughey 1995; Saegert et al. 2001). The confidence in building a successful business model results from high entrepreneurial self-efficacy (Sequeira et al. 2007). Moreover, in an emerging market, prospective social entrepreneurs exhibit high self-efficacy related to higher innovation, social impact, sustainability, and expandability of the venture (Urban 2015).

The definition of empowerment given by Rappaport (1987) is defined as an action through which people achieve the power to secure their lives and communities. It denotes a new perspective to social capital by emphasising the cognitive attributions and motivating forces that encourage community members to earn sustainable development. It also addresses the well-being of the individual and community level and the community’s empowerment (Douglas et al. 2002). The concept of social capital is defined as the gain of potential resources with the help of perceived reputation, social network, and personal contacts with investors and prospective customers (Chia and Liang 2016). Moreover, social capital is crucial for the acquisition of significant knowledge for the newer firms (Yli-Renko et al. 2001), especially when social entrepreneurs seek to gain the knowledge of market demands and needs considering social value creation (Austin et al. 2006).

6 Findings and Discussion

The paper established advancement in the study of Kumari (2020) with the effectiveness of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy for women empowerment and rural community development. Kumari (2020) proposed five primary functions relating to social entrepreneurs for tackling societal challenges, including women empowerment and rural community advancement. The excerpts of two community-oriented cases were modelled as social entrepreneurship ventures where one was engaged in female equality and inequality and skill development. In contrast, the other was involved in the revival of indigenous craft, women empowerment, and rural community support. At the same time, both cases proved that social entrepreneurs are indeed fundamentally critical agents for indigenous and rural community advancement.

Notably, the paper highlighted the essence and inherent values in the role of social entrepreneurs, not only in promoting women empowerment and rural community development in particular but also towards reviving indigenous crafts and facilitating the sustainability of the indigenous community, which has been lacking over the years. To be specific, the social entrepreneur’s self-efficacy demonstrates the role of social leader, influencer, motivator, employer, and network architect (see Fig. 1).

In Fig. 1, the researcher highlights the role of social entrepreneurial self-efficacy in women empowerment and rural community development.

Self-Efficacy

Both social entrepreneurs were determined to address the social issue of women empowerment and rural community development. However, their approach is different. Utpal Shaw was explicitly focused on endowing woodcraft skill development training for women empowerment of the rural community. Virendra Kumar was focused explicitly on reviving the indigenous craft of Paitker painting to facilitate the development of the Chitrakar community of Jharkhand. Social entrepreneurs are also seen as problem-solvers; these models unravelled the complex social problems by creating an impact on their communities (Zahra et al. 2009). Indigenous heritage could be established by the amalgamation of several elements like tradition, custom, creativity, and innovation. Artists and artisans play a significant role in creating, renewing, and transmitting indigenous heritage, reviving the cultural practices (Varutti 2015). Several factors can enable indigenous businesses that include operational business aspects like access to capital, supply, and a skilled workforce, with proper education and training (Whitford and Ruhanen 2010). Paitker is one of the oldest paintings of Jharkhand. It is more than 500 years old. As a social entrepreneur, Virendra is working to revive this art practice. Maatighar has three primary operations, i.e. research and development, product development, and artisans.

Social Leader

Based on these two case studies, both social entrepreneurs became apparent as social leaders. On the one hand, Utpal Shaw strived for women empowerment through employability using the endowment of woodcraft skills. On the other hand, Virendra Kumar illustrated his astonishment at the rare practice of the indigenous craft of Paitker painting. He observed the conditions of Paitker artisans very closely and decided to support the heritage art. He formed a team of experts and artisans to provide a marketable platform for the Paitker painting. Both cases show that social leaders and followers have contributed to the epoch-making effect on social development. In light of their perspectives, we further submit that Utpal Shaw and Virendra Kumar were equally exemplary inspirational and pragmatic social entrepreneurs in engendering female equality advocacy on the one hand and in indigenous and rural community advancement challenges on the other hand. Moreover, both social entrepreneurs do share a wide range of attributes and capabilities: rendering leadership (Dees 1998); originality, self-respect, resourcefulness, and inspiration (Borins 2000); uplifting disadvantaged and vulnerable indigenous and rural communities (Wallace 1999); exemplary community-oriented self-help leadership (Cornwall 1998); tackling practical issues for the needy (Hibbert et al. 2001); and pragmatic implementers of a vision (Haven-Tang and Jones 2012).

Influencer

Both social entrepreneurs have acted as influential factors in addressing two different social issues. Pipal Tree helped the women artisans realise their skill potential, whereas the Maatighar helped the indigenous community protect and preserve their heritage craft. Meanwhile, both social entrepreneurial ventures have enhanced the performance of the handicraft industry of Jharkhand. The major influential factors identified in both the social entrepreneurial ventures are their capabilities to enhance employment opportunities, socio-economic development of artisanal communities (women and indigenous), and improvement of the handicraft market (woodcraft and Paitker painting). Sociological scholars argue that the institutionalised patterns of behaviour and individual practices can be influenced by mutual dependence (Oliver 1991; Hodgson 2007). It can be modified, or even renewed, through the commitment of influential individuals or well-regulated groups (Martin 2000). Entrepreneurs act as change agents to convince their group members to collaborate and help achieve their desired objectives (Dorado 2005; Sotarauta 2009). So these change agents influence the behaviour of others owning to their network-based leadership and their interpretative power (Leca et al. 2008; Sotarauta and Pulkkinen 2011).

Motivator

Both social entrepreneurial ventures are perceived as drivers for indigenous and rural community advancement. Also, they have encouraged and motivated rural communities, especially women, to work in the handicraft clusters of Jharkhand. On the one hand, Pipal Tree has motivated the reluctant women of the indigenous rural community to learn woodcraft. In contrast, Maatighar has urged the destitute Chitrakars to continue their heritage craft. It was not easy to convince women to learn craft skills due to the setbacks of family and society.

Moreover, due to the decline of Paitker painting, many artisans from the Chitrakar community had left the craft practice. Virendra Kumar’s motivation helped many artisans learn and improve the craft as per the standard market demand. Scholars interpreted motivation differently in the context of social entrepreneurship: SEs are drivers for success (Holland 1985) or enablers, facilitators, and innovators (Stettner 2003). They encourage their employees to offer innovative ideas and, if needed, delegate responsibilities to them (Stettner 2003) or reward or recognise success (Bundaleska 2007). The entrepreneur should award if the employee has successfully implemented the idea (Bundaleska 2007).

Employer

Both social entrepreneurial ventures successfully employ their targeted segment, whether tribal women artisans or rural communities. However, both social entrepreneurial ventures have different business models. Pipal Tree has evolved over the years. Initially, the business model was simple, as fewer artisans were working for social entrepreneurial ventures. It all started in 2014 with the commencement of induction programs in nearby rural areas of Ghatshila. Utpal Shaw visited two to three women with his team to encourage more women to learn woodcraft skills and earn a better livelihood. Once women showed their interest, he started their training. After training, they were ready to work on the site or at home as per their comfort. Women were given the designs and raw materials which they carve at their home or the workshop. After cutting techniques, it is delivered to the workshop, where master artisans assemble these designed pieces. After assembling, the woodcrafts are packed and delivered to the destination retails of Pipal Tree. They encourage their customers to get involved either through woodcraft design or feedback.

However, the business model evolved in 2018 as the number of skilled artisans increased and demand increased. The advanced business model of Pipal Tree is connected to different villages via village coordinators. Each village coordinator is responsible for ten artisans. The respective village coordinators get the requisition of woodcrafts from the Ranchi production centre. Archana is in charge of the Ranchi production centre. She knows pretty well which village coordinator is good in which woodcraft. At Ranchi production centre, Malti analyses the inventory and stock of raw materials and finished products. She has been told to put requisition of woodcraft items if three items from a box have been sold.

The administration team of Pipal Tree has a total of seven trainers and three production managers. The trainers are looking after the Khunti and Godda districts of Jharkhand. The trainers are responsible for the endowment of woodcraft skills under corporate social responsibility and government training programs. Along with training, they also monitor the progress of artisans. Also, out of three production managers, one is looking after Jamshedpur city, and two are taking care of Patratu (Ramgarh) town of Jharkhand.

The prime intention of Maatighar is to revive the Paitker painting. Therefore, their long-term measures are to aware customers about Paitker, encourage skill development for reluctant Paitker artisans, and induce standard production. They have no retail space, but they are freelancing for Jharcraft and Pipal Tree organisations. However, recently, they have started working with Amazon to sell their craft on e-tailing. The measurement of the internal process is the operational indicators of productivity and quality, measured constantly. The longer view entails the learning and growth, the profitability of the firm now and in the future.

Network Architect

These social entrepreneurial ventures have acted as network architects by connecting the artisans to the desired segment of the market. Pipal Tree had started with its retail platforms, but later on, they have approached Jharkhand government and e-commerce platforms. The Jharkhand government has given them retail spaces at all the tourist places of Jharkhand. They have also created their website from where the artisans get orders and sell without the interference of intermediaries. Maatighar has no big team, and their skilled artisans are also few; therefore, they have not launched their retail and online platform. However, they are using their network to sell the Paitker craft. Earlier, Paitker artisans were not aware of modern marketing and retail media. Still, Maatighar has linked them to various e-commerce platforms from where they get their orders without the interference of intermediaries. They have approached online shopping platforms like amazon.in and Flipkart.in for selling the Paitker painting. They have started it with small orders as they lack skilled artisans. According to social capital theory, external networks help firms gain access to resources that may be responsible for their business performance and survival (Adler and Kwon 2002). Interaction of entrepreneurial intention with external connections helps enhance social entrepreneurial ventures’ performance (Lee et al. 2001). Networks that connect entrepreneurs to capital, suppliers, employees, partners, and customers are the principal constituent for ease of the ongoing process of the social entrepreneurial ventures (Kline and Milburn 2010).

The study identified the most significant roles of social entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy: social leadership, influencing and motivating rural communities to create value creation vis-a-vis generating employment for the local community, especially women, and building strategic networks and collaboration with significant others. The social enterprises helped the indigenous rural community to participate in the skill development training programs, thereby extending sustainable livelihood. Moreover, it helped to enhance the self-dependency of women by making them breadwinners of the family. Also, women are financially running the family, thereby experiencing a reduced rate of domestic violence in their homes and thereby gaining more acknowledgement and recognition of women in society. They have moreover improved access to better educational opportunities and facilities for their children. Crucially, the research also observed remarkable gains being made in such areas; evidence of the sustainability of the crucial Paitker painting sector would be a positive and constructive step towards advancement of the craftsmanship market and broader connections to the target market of the product.

Notably, the research also revealed how these roles are linked to their skills and experiences. They have persuaded government policymakers to provide marketing facilities such as building space for organising exhibitions, and training programs have enabled additional work such as freelancing in Paitker artisanship. Also, they have managed to gain teaching consultancy jobs with reputable schools in Jamshedpur, where they practise teaching Paitker artisanship to students more directly in their hobby classes. Moreover, quantitatively the numbers of Paitker artists have increased from just 2 to over 15. Also, there has been increased interest in painting woodcrafts.

Moreover, there is also the promotion of cultural products and services through the Internet platform. The launching of websites encouraged and enabled customers to observe live workshops while the exhibition allows customers to place customised orders online and more. The use of online facilities has also enabled taking website service of the hot jar in attracting potential consumers through their websites, which has improved the knowledge of customers’ buying behaviours of woodcrafts and Paitker painting. Moreover, offering the crafts trade with strategic support radicalised the handicraft sector. Also, it helped with the sustainability of the Paitker painting within the indigenous rural community which was critically analysed.

The researchers also identify areas of barriers and challenges that are impacting on social entrepreneurial efforts. While there are improvements in the condition of handicraft social enterprises due to social entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy through innovative measures, deeper engagement, and participation in the revival of the indigenous crafts and sustainability of the woodcrafts sector, at the same time, the combination of challenges are detrimental: lack of access to finance, as they are primarily self-funding, negligence of administration, illiteracy, meeting quality standards, productivity constraints, marketing channels, outlets, and unskilled artisans.

7 Conclusion

The two cases have reinforced that social entrepreneurs are catalysts for women’s empowerment and indigenous and rural community advancement. Rural community advancement, including improvement in the welfare, wellness, and well-being of the indigenous communities that have suffered multidimensional disadvantages, was critical. Progress in living conditions of the indigenous people and rural communities could be best learned sufficiently, according to the Human Development Index (HDI) (Bannerjee 2018). Furthermore, the “capability approach to development” is considered a more “people-centric” strategy towards eliminating impoverishment in a needy society (Sen 1993). It is fundamentally critical to encourage, motivate, and support social entrepreneurs and indigenous and rural communities to embrace “employment security” as well as “security “through employability,” both of which phenomena are equally useful and relevant sustainable approaches to learning. There is also a need to acknowledge resources and capabilities while still appreciating their crucial differences (Subramanian et al. 2013). The significant strengths of artisans may include the ability the sustenance craftsmanship, revenue creating, self-employment, as well as employment creation and commitment/dedication to entrepreneurship, all of which collectively work together towards the achievement of indigenous community regeneration and rural economic growth in general (Ahamed and Karim 2019). Eliminating improvement, including other barriers such as education, may stimulate societal progress in general (Bannerjee 2018).

Further, this study advanced insightful depth concerning the roles of social entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy in collective terms, particularly in connection with women empowerment and indigenous and rural community development in the Jharkhand region of India. Nevertheless, there is a greater scope of research in different situations with different types of social entrepreneurs. Crucially, the study advocated the positive and constructive changes of social enterprises in the handicraft industry, which is helpful in indigenous and rural community survival and the sustainability of the entire nation: in the micro-, meso-, and macro-development sense of the perception.

Similarly, the paper reinforced that social entrepreneurs are particularly resourceful in keeping handicraft entrepreneurship alive and motivating and encouraging skill development, critical to the indigenous and rural community, thereby contributing positively and constructively towards poverty eradication through access to local, national, and international marketing platforms.

Besides the above outcomes, the paper also identified some limitations, including critical areas for further research, which may interest readers. Firstly, this is a methodological development research paper, and as such, literature is purposively limited to only the theoretical framework underpinning this study. Secondly, this study utilised two social entrepreneurial ventures: great contrasts, they are similar in several ways. Nevertheless, the underlying challenges are more alike than different. Thirdly, the study highlighted five functions of social entrepreneurs in the context of the Jharkhand region of India. There might be more roles potentially elsewhere. Furthermore, there may be a possibility that continuing research may uncover novel functions that social entrepreneurs need to engage in to enrich our understanding of the theory of social entrepreneurs, which has hitherto been missing. Therefore, as this study was centred around the Jharkhand region, it automatically opens up further research opportunities for similar research in other areas across India and other developing countries.