Resource-based theory (RBT) states that a firm is seen as a portfolio of tangible and intangible assets that can be used to gain a competitive advantage and optimal organizational performance in the short term (Barney, 1991; Austin & Seitanidi, 2011; McKelvie & Davidsson, 2009; Rumelt et al., 1991). Based on this theory, an organization owns or has access to different resources working together create capabilities to attain the organization's successwhich have the ability to achieve (Hart & Dowell, 2011; Molloy, Chadwick et al., 2011). Hence, variations in the amount of resources and capabilities available are the justifications for persistent differences in performance (Finney et al., 2008; Foss et al., 1995). Indeed, RBT focuses on the heterogeneity of firms in terms of these two factors to explain such differences (Killen, Jugdev, Drouin & Petit, 2012). Meyskens et al. (2010) add that RBT is also applied to and observed in social entrepreneurship, finding an operational process similar to that of economic ventures. Indeed, social entrepreneurs need to attract and manage a wide range of resources to accomplish their mission, as do all entrepreneurs (Bauer et al., 2012; Austin et al., 2006; Mair & Noboa, 2006; Sakurai, 2008; Bojica et al., 2018).

On a similar note, in accordance with social network theory, social entrepreneur networks are important for resource acquisition and the management of social organizations in order that they can accomplish their social missions. The analysis of some definitions of social entrepreneurship reveals the role of networks in the management of social organizations (Austin et al., 2006; Bauer et al., 2012; Leadbeater, 1997; Mair & Martí, 2006; Sakurai, 2008; Sharir & Lerner, 2006; Chell, 2007).

Throughout the entrepreneurial process, social entrepreneur networks act as support for initial entrepreneurial activity (raising resources), improving the operational efficiency of a business (i.e., management of human, physical and financial resources) (Stuart & Sorenson, 2005). Further, to create a venture, new formal and informal networks are developed, which include family, friends, acquaintances, private organizations and public institutions (Birley, 1985; Aldrich & Zimmer, 1986).

The role that an entrepreneur’s network plays in the resource acquisition process has been acknowledged by Witt (2004). As stated by the author, “founders can gain access to resources more cheaply by using their network contacts than by using market transactions, and that they can acquire resources from the network that would not be available via market transactions at all”. Additionally, the “opportunity to procure resources (…) arises due to friendship or kinship ties to network partners” that “offer the entrepreneur specific resources at no charge or below the market price simply to do them a favor or to return a favor that they received earlier (Witt, 2004, p. 394).” To Aldrich and Zimmer (1986), entrepreneurship is facilitated by links between aspiring entrepreneurs, resources and opportunities that can be used to source advice and business information, which in turn can help to alleviate problems in society. A study by Krebs and Holley (2006) advocates that individual social entrepreneurs’ networks enable social organizations to design and implement effective strategies to link other entities of this type to them and deliver more business support to each other.

A review of the literature referring to the role of social networks in social entrepreneurship concludes that social networks are useful vehicles enabling social entrepreneurs to have access to important resources (Dangmei, 2016). Additionally, an empirical investigation carried out on Norwegian entrepreneurs confirms that social networks are substantial tools for capturing resources (Jenssen, 2001). Based on the same data, Jenssen and Koenig (2002) reinforce the idea that social networks allow easier access to financial resources. Stuart and Sorensen (2005) share the same position on the importance of social networks in facilitating the mobilization of financial capital flows. Other authors add that social networks play a critical role in locating valuable resources and improving acquisition capability (Ge et al., 2009).

In a synthesis of the literature, Zhang et al. (2010) show that social networks are widely recognized for being successful tools for funding entrepreneurial ventures. Specifically, strong ties (e.g., friends and family, acquaintances, donors, or sponsors) are more important for securing initial funding than market methods (e.g., banks and investors).

The positive impact of social networks on fundraising has been found in different financial situations ranging from crowdfunding (Kuppuswamy & Bayus, 2014; Lehner, 2014; Skirnevskiy et al., 2017; Kang et al., 2017) and donations (Galaskiewicz et al., 2006; Herzog & Yang, 2017), to funding operations involving larger amounts of resources (Matcht, 2016).

Human resources are also an important input for social organizations to accomplish their mission. In a dynamic and competitive labor market, the quest for human resources is challenging for social ventures. Therefore, an entrepreneur’s network becomes critical in the process of identifying and recruiting workers for the social venture (Stuart & Sorensen, 2005).

A literature review about the contribution of networks to the organizational growth of the non-profit sector shows that social networks are useful for recruiting new members, even though they may have a negative impact on employees’ turnover, since individuals could use their ties to find new jobs and abandon the social organization with a corresponding loss of knowledge (Galaskiewicz et al., 2006). In the social entrepreneurship domain, a qualitative investigation reveals that social networks are critical for social organizations to mobilize resources (Bernardino et al., 2017). It also claims that some of the human resources companies use to pursue their social missions are provided under the cooperation established between a social entrepreneur and his/her network. The use of networks for human resource acquisition occurs mainly to hire specialized employees and volunteers (Bernardino et al., 2017).

Following these arguments, we hypothesize that:

H1A) Social entrepreneurs’ reliance on their personal networks to build relationships with their new stakeholders is positively related to an increase in resources for their social organizations

Relationships are established as a result of a gamut of daily interactions, such as those with friends, family, co-workers, volunteers, donors and other stakeholders (Bourdieu, 1986). Therefore, networking is seen as an activity for connecting with others and adding new nodes (e.g., persons or organizations) to a given network joined together by the relationships formed (Hoang & Antoncic, 2003; Littlewood & Khan, 2018). In modern societies, online interaction through social media has replaced face-to-face contacts as a way of sharing and exchanging ideas, opinions and knowledge (Finkbeiner, 2013). Indeed, social media is now considered an online public space where existing social ties can be maintained and new acquaintances or friends can be found (Hampton et al., 2011).

Studies on relationships between physical and online communities show that computer-mediated interactions have positive effects on communication with others (Hampton & Wellman, 2003; Kavanaugh et al., 2005). Additionally, social media helps form new relationships, in the sense that it provides an alternative way for peers to connect with each other who share interests or relational goals (Ellison et al., 2006; Parks & Floyd, 1996).

As pointed out by Smith and Smith (2021), networking could benefit from digital tools and take advantage of digital capabilities such as searchability and shareability to facilitate networking. Indeed, social media can change entrepreneurs’ network compositions, making individuals and organizations more closely connected, reinforcing their entrepreneurial capabilities (Zhao et al., 2022).

Boase et al. (2006) conclude that individuals who use social media are more likely to have a larger network of close friends than those who do not, and that these account holders are more likely to receive assistance for any queries they may make. Specifically, social media allows users to expand their networks in different ways and provides the opportunity for new forms of interpersonal relationships to take shape (Donath & Boyd, 2004; Boase et al., 2006). According to Wellman et al. (2001), social media increases online interaction, which could substitute face-to-face communication, and even reduce the amount of time spent online.

Past research indicates that Internet-based linkages support the formation of weak ties, Ellison et al., (2007) suggesting that new forms of relationship-building can occur on online platforms. There are many social media sites where the formation of weak ties is required as this allows users to create and maintain larger, and more widely spread networks of relationships (Ellison et al. 2007). Indeed, social media eases online interactions by providing weak ties with a wider range of information exchange between individuals. This enhances face-to-face communication as members of a network become more aware of each other’s needs and strengthen relationships through more frequent contact (Wellman et al. 2001). Finkbeiner (2013) suggests that social interaction on social media allows existing ties to be maintained online and new ones to be formed, where similar interests can be shared. Recently, Zhao et al. (2022) defend that the use of social media created and sustained online by digital technologies is important for the development of social networks.

Therefore, the following hypothesis is postulated:

H2A) Social entrepreneurs’ reliance on their personal networks is positively related to social media usage to seek relationships with new stakeholders

Social media allows individuals to build their own profiles, add friends or contacts to lists and exchange information with others over the Internet (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Smith & Smith, 2021). Such platforms usually include communication tools that allow members to capture, store, and exchange information and interact with others by way of interactive tools. Using said platforms, social groups can share information with others in an online setting, forming social networks based on transactions, interests, or relationships (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Cao et al., 2013).

There are many social media platforms, so it is important for social organizations to define a strategy to decide which one is the most appropriate for them if they want to attract the right crowd. Some (e.g. LinkedIn) are focused on professional profiles to make business connections while others (e.g. Facebook) are more oriented to the general public allowing photos, videos and posts to be shared.

It must also be mentioned that the handling of social media platforms is a full time job as social organizations must stay active and update posts on all platforms to communicate their social mission, inform the community about their activities and answer questions from specific stakeholders and the general public. According to Picazo-Vela et al.(2012), the lack of up-to-date entries could undermine the credibility and accuracy of the information posted on these sites.

Social media features and functionality affect how users interact, coordinate and form relationships with contacts such as friends, family members, and business partners (Gnyawali et al. 2010). According to Zeng et al. (2010), social media sites are unique information sources that allow users to discover very valuable opportunities for social and economic exchange.

Social media has become an important tool for social organizations to connect with their stakeholders and it has changed the way which we create, collaborate, spend, and communicate helping establish conversations with donors or potential volunteers and enabling direct contacts with other potential stakeholder.

Social media platforms enable social organizations to exchange, share, disseminate and search for information quickly, efficiently, and inexpensively (Xu & Saxton, 2019; Bhati & McDonnell, 2020). They are increasingly being used to support fundraising campaigns (Bhati & McDonnell, 2020), recruit volunteers (Ihm, 2017), and mobtain other types of resources in the online context (Zhou & Pan, 2016).

Social organizations use social media for crafting, supporting, and executing fundraising campaigns. Bhati and McDonnell (2020) have examined social media data on Facebook’s nonprofit website and find that fundraising success is positively associated with the number of likes, posts, and shares. In a systematic review of the literature on the use of social media for fundraising by nonprofit organizations, Di Lauro et al.(2019) refer to the benefits of increased transparency and accountability, operational involvement and engagement, and improved organizational image (although in respect of the latter two, the outcomes may vary). Investigating the advantages of donating by social media, Sura et al.(2017) point out efficiency and cost-effective factors or, simply put, the easy, quick and direct transfer of money. Tian et al. (2021) note a positive and significant relationship between several media activities of nonprofit organizations (whereby communication is initiated on their social media pages) and donations.

A study developed by Ihm (2017) shows that social media allows individuals to participate in online volunteering activities, which may include sharing posts, promoting awareness of social issues, eliciting donations, encouraging others to volunteer, examining data online, or managing websites for good causes. In some social organizations, volunteers may also provide professional services, such as preparing tax returns, writing legal documents, and offering management consulting (Ihm, 2017).

Social organizations can use social media to publish their individual stories about social causes to a wide audience as a means of mobilizing collective action, often referred to as connective action (Ihm, 2017). In China, Zhou and Pan (2016) find that despite Internet censorship and the unique government-NGO relationship, Chinese NGOs use social media to attract followers, share information, improve organizational legitimacy, build up a community, and obtain resources. Based on qualitative research, Smith and Smith (2021) observe that entrepreneurs use digital networks more restrictively, mainly to access information to gather material resources. For the authors, this result is constrained by entrepreneurs’ awareness of the availability of resources in their digital networks, mainly when it comes to their willingness to exploit them and the perceived social judgment risk, which could lead to acceptance or rejection of the acquisition of resources through online networks. Even so, Smith and Smith (2021, p.479) argue that digital platforms could act as “capacitor networks that store potential resources to be extracted mainly by private means”.

Based on the above empirical evidence, the following hypotheses are offered:

H3A) The use of social media by social entrepreneurs to create relationships with new stakeholders is positively related to an increase in resources for their social organizations