Exploring Quintuple Helix Collaboration for Sustainable Community Development through Social Enterprises in Malaysia

This study explores the role of Quintuple Helix collaboration in supporting social enterprises in Malaysia. The Quintuple Helix model emphasizes collaboration among universities, industry, government, public society, and the natural environment in achieving sustainable community development. Social enterprises in Malaysia face various challenges, including financial sustainability, limited networking opportunities, and lack of institutional support. Therefore, collaboration among multiple stakeholders is essential to strengthen their sustainability and social impact. This study employed a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews with 11 social enterprises operating in Malaysia. The collected data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings revealed that universities contribute through training, internships, and knowledge sharing, while industries provide mentorship, networking, and funding opportunities. Government agencies support social enterprises through financial assistance, policy initiatives, and entrepreneurship programs. Public society contributes through volunteering and community engagement, whereas environmental organizations encourage sustainable practices and green initiatives. The study contributes to the growing literature on social entrepreneurship and collaborative ecosystems by providing empirical evidence on the importance of Quintuple Helix collaboration in supporting social enterprises in Malaysia.

Quintuple Helix; Social Enterprise; Thematic Approach

1. Adnan, R. M., Yusoff, W. F. W., & Ghazali, N. (2018). The role of social entrepreneurship in Malaysia: A preliminary analysis. Advanced Science Letters, 24(5), 3264-3269. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Amran, A., Ooi, S. K., Nejati, M., Zulkafli, A. H., & Lim, B. A. (2012). Relationship of firm attributes, ownership structure and business network on climate change efforts: evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 19(5), 406-414. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Apostu, S. A., Mukli, L., Panait, M., Gigauri, I., & Hysa, E. (2022). Economic growth through the lenses of education, entrepreneurship, and innovation. Administrative Sciences, 12(3), 74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. (2012). The Quintuple Helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship, 1(1), 2. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2014). Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: arts, democracy, and innovation in Quadruple Helix innovation systems. Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship, 3(1), 12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Carayannis, E. G., Grigoroudis, E., Campbell, D. F., Meissner, D., & Stamati, D. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory‐building study of regional co‐opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R&d Management, 48(1), 148-162. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2010). Conceptions of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in Europe and the United States: Convergences and divergences. Journal of social entrepreneurship, 1(1), 32-53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda. International journal of management reviews, 16(4), 417-436. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Elkington, J. (1997). The triple bottom line. Environmental management: Readings and cases, 2(1997), 49-66. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Etzkowitz, H. (2017). The triple helix: University–industry–government innovation and entrepreneurship. In: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Etzkowitz, H., & Zhou, C. (2023). Entrepreneurial university conception: an instauration for the advancement and utilization of knowledge. In Research Handbook on the Transformation of Higher Education (pp. 296-316). Edward Elgar Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fusch, P., Fusch, G. E., & Ness, L. R. (2018). Denzin’s paradigm shift: Revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Sustainable Social Change, 10(1), 2. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Fayolle, A., Klofsten, M., & Mian, S. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small business economics, 47(3), 551-563. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Halibas, A. S., Sibayan, R. O., & Maata, R. L. R. (2017). the Penta Helix Model of Innovation in Oman: an HEI Perspective. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge & Management, 12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ketprapakorn, N., & Kantabutra, S. (2019). Sustainable social enterprise model: Relationships and consequences. Sustainability, 11(14), 3772. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Kramer, M. R., & Porter, M. (2011). Creating shared value (Vol. 17). FSG Boston, MA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Le Blanc, D. (2015). Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network of targets. Sustainable Development, 23(3), 176-187. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Littlewood, D., & Holt, D. (2018). How social enterprises can contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)–A conceptual framework. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of world business, 41(1), 36-44. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Matarrita-Cascante, D., & Brennan, M. A. (2012). Conceptualizing community development in the twenty-first century. Community development, 43(3), 293-305. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Mensah, J. (2019). Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent social sciences, 5(1), 1653531. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Nicholls, A. (2010). The legitimacy of social entrepreneurship: Reflexive isomorphism in a pre–paradigmatic field. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(4), 611-633. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Phillips, W., Lee, H., Ghobadian, A., O’regan, N., & James, P. (2015). Social innovation and social entrepreneurship: A systematic review. Group & Organization Management, 40(3), 428-461. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Rahdari, A., Sepasi, S., & Moradi, M. (2016). Achieving sustainability through Schumpeterian social entrepreneurship: The role of social enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 347-360. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Saebi, T., Foss, N. J., & Linder, S. (2019). Social entrepreneurship research: Past achievements and future promises. Journal of management, 45(1), 70-95. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Saunders, M. N., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students (Eighth). Harlow: Pearson education limited. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Sidek, F., Pavlovich, K., & Gibb, J. (2018). Entrepreneurship as worship: A Malay Muslim perspective. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(5), 698-710. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Tonkovic, A. M., Veckie, E., & Veckie, V. W. (2015). Aplications of Penta Helix model in economic development. Economy of eastern Croatia yesterday, today, tommorow, 4, 385-393. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Urbano, D., Aparicio, S., Guerrero, M., Noguera, M., & Torrent-Sellens, J. (2017). Institutional determinants of student employer entrepreneurs at Catalan universities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 271-282. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria