Communicating the Dual Mission: Analysis of Websites of Finnish Social Enterprise Mark Holders

Abstract

Social enterprises are defined as organizations that prioritize social goals over profit maximization. However, to sustain these goals, they must also remain economically viable. The tension between social and commercial logics, and the ways organizations manage this balance, is a central theme in social enterprise research. Despite this, little attention has been paid to how such tensions are communicated externally. This paper addresses this gap by analyzing the websites of 157 Finnish limited companies that have been awarded the Social Enterprise Mark. The study examines how these firms communicate the two main criteria for receiving the mark: generating social good and allocating a significant share of profits toward that goal. Additionally, the analysis explores whether and how companies incorporate commercial aims—such as growth and profitability—into their strategy and mission statements. The findings identify three distinct ways in which social and commercial logics are combined, resulting in a typology of three company types. The first type, labeled “idealists,” emphasizes social impact as the primary purpose of the organization and does not explicitly address commercial aspects. Some even rhetorically distance themselves from traditional business language, presenting themselves as communities rather than companies and referring to customers as partners. The second type, “pragmatists,” presents profitability as a means to achieve social objectives. These organizations—often owned by municipalities or non-profit entities—highlight cost-efficiency and financial sustainability as necessary conditions for fulfilling their social mission. The third type, “legitimizers,” communicates social goals in very broad or unclear terms and does not explicitly state how profits contribute to social purposes. As a result, these firms are difficult to distinguish from conventional companies based on their external communications. The study contributes to academic discussions by demonstrating that organizations labeled as social enterprises vary significantly in how they interpret and communicate compliance with certification criteria. Practically, the findings offer insights for organizations responsible for awarding social enterprise labels, particularly in evaluating how clearly and consistently such criteria are communicated.