





































 

95 

 
 

 

 

 

https://www.designforsocialchange.org/journal/index.php/DISCERN-J 

 

ISSN 2184-6995 

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 

International License. 

 

  

 

 

 

Involving or not the beneficiaries as role players in social initiative games: 

Analysis of case studies 
 

Pedro Sancho, Rute Gomes, Cláudia Pernencar 

 

Published online: October 2021 

 

To cite this article:  

Sancho, P., Gomes, R., & Pernencar, C. (2021). Involving or not the beneficiaries as role players in social 

initiative games, analysis of case studies. Discern: International Journal of Design for Social Change, 

Sustainable Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 95-122. 

 
 

 

  



 

96 

Involving or not the beneficiaries as role players in social initiative games: 
Analysis of case studies 
 

Pedro Sanchoa, Rute Gomesb, Cláudia Pernencar c, d 

 
aIADE, Faculty of Design, Technology and Communication, European University, 1200-649,  

Lisbon, Portugal. Psanchoferreira@gmail.com 
bCIAUD, Lisbon School of Architecture, Lisbon University, 1349-063, Lisbon, Portugal. Rutegomes@fa.ulisboa.pt 
cICNOVA, Nova Institute of Communication, Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, NOVA University of Lisbon, 

1069-061, Lisbon, Portugal. Claudiapernencar@fcsh.unl.pt 
dLIDA, Research Laboratory of Design and Arts, School of Fine Arts and Design, Polytechnic of Leiria,  

2500-321 Caldas da Rainha, Portugal. 

 

Abstract 

Social inequalities are increasing the initiatives in which the provident state is requested to find solutions 

and tools to improve the social impact. In this perspective, the management and entrepreneurship fields 

assume a huge relevance in social innovation and social entrepreneurship. Manzini suggests (2015) that  

a more efficient model for fighting social inequalities within a vulnerable community is to involve the 

beneficiaries in the process when solving social problems through project development. With the focus  

on Manzini’s (2015) proposal and having in mind the beneficiaries’ involvement in this kind of initiative,  

a question emerged: What is the role of the beneficiaries’ involvement as a critical success factor in the 

development of social innovation projects? A literature review was undertaken and guided the action  

of a case studies analysis matrix following these parameters: 1) business model; 2) public funding 

dependency; 3) beneficiaries’ involvement levels and 4) business sustainability/longevity. Seven social 

entrepreneurship projects were analysed. The results and the discussion conclude that a correlation 

between longevity and the beneficiaries’ involvement exists. When people are suffering from a lack of basic 

needs, their involvement in a project is affected. In such cases, the project’s success is at risk. This being so, 

the design of social impact projects should consider the beneficiaries’ involvement to positively influence 

their longevity. However, for this to happen, beneficiaries’ basic needs should be assured. 

 

Keywords: Beneficiaries’ involvement, Design for social change, Social entrepreneurship, Social 

inequalities, Sustainable development 

 

Introduction 

Social impact projects have been growing, according to Bahmani et al. (2012). This increase is due to the 

ineffectiveness of social policies based on welfare models. These practices are focused on fighting social 

inequalities that are overcharging the national providence resources (Netto, 2013). As a social service 

mechanism, it involves donating goods or services directly to the beneficiaries without any level of 

involvement or commitment by them. 

 

Welfare practices do not solve the existing root of the problem but rather the consequences. In this way, 

public and private project development agents keep being overwhelmed with problems that are not  

solved effectively. 

 



 

97 

In this context, management and social entrepreneurship began to have a huge relevance through the 

application of specific tools that provide efficiency and innovation, fight poverty and hunger and improve 

the health system, housing and education. 

 

This article aims to understand how the beneficiaries’ involvement directly affects the social impact of a 

project’s success. As suggested by authors such as Manzini (2015), beneficiaries suffering from social 

inequalities may play a very important role in the development of a social impact solution through their 

involvement. This context can be measured using different levels of involvement as proposed by Manzini 

(2015, p. 107). Each level implies distinct project management approaches and beneficiary behaviour. 

 

The study that will be presented in this article intends to answer the following research question: What is 

the role of the beneficiary’s involvement as a critical success factor in the development of social  

innovation projects?  

 

Literature review 

Social impact projects are overloaded because social inequalities have increased. They aim to ensure the 

country’s providence resources. The overloading scenario happens for various reasons: 1) human resources 

with low salaries or working as volunteers; 2) social organizations operating in the field without a strategic 

vision; 3) lack of management competencies (Franco, 2015); 4) a great dependence on public funding, but 

most of all; 5) by the fact that the structures that fight against social inequalities usually follow welfare 

practices and do not provide any investment in social policies to eradicate the main causes of this  

inequality (Netto, 2013). 

 

The welfare state is a system that allows a country’s government to assure social services to its population, 

such as public health, unemployment support, etc. For that, taxes are used. This path is essential in fighting 

inequalities, but the system becomes overwhelmed/overcharged. This happens because a great 

dependence on the system by its beneficiaries exists. 

 

This scenario caught the attention of several entrepreneurs with a set of tools, techniques and models used 

in corporate entrepreneurship. These entrepreneurs developed individual or collective initiatives to fight 

against social inequalities generated by different actual contexts. Thus, the entrepreneurship and 

management fields assumed greater importance in social innovation and social entrepreneurship. The 

inclusion of these themes in different contexts, expressed by the need to make social initiatives financially 

self-sustainable, either by patrons’ donations, strategic partnerships or the sale of their own products or 

initiatives. New business and collaboration models amongst partners seek these initiatives to become 

sustainable and increase their positive impact (Bahmani et al., 2012). Manzini (2015) defends a strategy 

where involving the beneficiaries in the production and management of a social entrepreneurship initiative 

is a key factor. 



 

98 

 
 

Figure 1:  Beneficiaries’ involvement quadrants in social innovation projects.  

Source: Manzini (2015, p. 107), Fernando Vieira’s illustration. 

 

Manzini claims that last century was dominated by the concept of “If someone is hungry give them fast 

food or a tin of ready to eat (or, if they can afford it, give them a luxury restaurant)” (Manzini 2015, p.94). 

This assumption focuses on solving inequalities without any effort, thought or knowledge production 

developed by beneficiaries. This is the kind of approach Netto (2013) refers to. They neither improve the 

individual’s conduct of systematic problem-solving nor seek effectiveness and longevity. 

 

Social impact solutions that select beneficiaries as actors in the project development can add value to the 

project, as the beneficiaries invest their own time managing and operating the project. This is one of the 

most efficient ways to develop social impact, a long-lasting project and ensure the subsistence of the 

initiative. Manzini (2015) proposed levels that assume different parameters (Fig. 1): 

 

1. Quadrant A: Beneficiaries show low levels of involvement in the activity. Manzini claims that this 

happens when the provider/designer only serves the final user. In this ‘collaborative encounter’, 

the condition of being involved does not reveal huge value through the project collaboration. This 

quadrant is found in welfare-based projects. 

2. Quadrant B: Also represents beneficiaries’ low levels of involvement. However, here, they are final 

users and involved in the project’s design and management. The goal is to understand how the 

project can serve them efficiently. The path here is not directed towards the organization. 

3. Quadrant C: The beneficiaries are intensively involved in the project’s activities. There is co-

production amongst the beneficiaries. Both providers and beneficiaries are co-producers and add 

value in a collaborative perspective. 

4. Quadrant D: The beneficiaries have a strong connection. They are involved autonomously in project 

activities without the provider’s intervention. All the social innovation operation is in the 

beneficiaries’ charge, who become simultaneously the project providers and beneficiaries. 



 

99 

 

In more urgent operational contexts, such as agriculture and fighting poverty, beneficiaries’ involvement is 

a key factor in designing, implementing and measuring the social initiative. Working with beneficiaries in  

a project allows them to recognise their weaknesses, and consequently, the project design will easily meet 

their needs (Foley et al., nd). Similarly, Thou (2012) argues that beneficiary involvement provides more 

sustainability in a project because the metrics that monitor it are used by the own project’s beneficiaries. 

This scenario allows an efficient and effective adjustment of the project’s strategy. In short, beneficiary 

involvement contributes to the activities’ operationalization required by a social initiative and allows the 

development of more successful and reliable metrics, based on the beneficiaries’ inclusion in their planning. 

 

The opposite scenario also happens. In Africa, for example, many development programmes are planned 

and implemented without community inclusion, which led them to close. Another critical success factor is 

when a great dependence on communitarian funds for project development is used to fight the problem 

(Kinyata & Abiodun, 2020). In sum, the involvement of beneficiaries in a social initiative acts as a tool of 

empowerment. The beneficiaries acquire deeper knowledge about their problems, which allows them to 

identify real needs and design initiatives that are more likely to have an effective social impact. This means 

that the involved actors are articulating, working and managing more effective realistic project metrics. 

 

Methods and materials 

To answer the question set, two main methods were applied: First, a narrative literature review of 

communitarian intervention (Kinyata & Abiodun, 2020), design for social innovation (Manzini, 2015),  

social entrepreneurship (Patel & Mehta, 2011) and social service (Netto, 2013) with the main goal of 

understanding the importance for beneficiaries of being engaged in a social initiative. Second, we listed 

specific parameters to help the research team develop a qualitative analysis method to compare social 

entrepreneurship case studies. This critical empirical analysis aimed to comprehend different 

practices/models of management and functioning related to social entrepreneurship projects and  

identify the relevance of beneficiaries’ involvement as a critical success factor. 

 

Tool - case studies comparative table 

With a list of parameters to figure out each social entrepreneurship case study’s details, a comparative 

table was developed in two sections, as follows: 

1. Identification: Based on the project’s identity from the Portuguese Social Innovation and 

Entrepreneurship Map (MIES), the topics were: 1) goal of the project and excluded intervention 

areas; 2) identified problem; 3) entrepreneurs’ identification; 4) function and impact on 

geographical area; 5) identification used, as they were not framed within the research goal. 

Parameters as a business model and longevity were added empirically aiming to establish a 

relationship amongst both. Manzini’s beneficiary involvement scale (Manzini, 2015) correlates 

beneficiary involvement in a social initiative with the business model and consequently with 

longevity. By contrast, the topic of dependence on public funds was introduced because the 

researchers wanted to understand if there was a direct relationship between this and longevity. 

2.  Analysis: 1) business model, comprising a set of activities enabling a project’s increase in social 

value in; 2) public funding dependency, i.e. how much these initiatives rely/depend on public 

funding to carry on their mission; 3) beneficiary involvement level, i.e. the involvement of the 

beneficiaries in the project, on distinct levels (Manzini, 2015); and 4) business sustainability/ 

longevity, representing the time the project remains active and its growth. 

 



 

100 

Sample selection 

The inclusion criteria for the case studies were: 1) social entrepreneurship initiative and 2) involving 

activities from distinct intervention areas. These are justified because social entrepreneurship projects and 

profit-generatin entrepreneurship projects reveal natures from different contexts and several distinct 

actors, such as stakeholders, beneficiaries, cultures and developed solutions. A variety of social 

entrepreneurship projects enables more diverse analysis. 

 

Table 1 presents the seven social entrepreneurship initiatives selected from MIES, the Portuguese platform 

that records in detail the spatial distribution of social innovation and entrepreneurship nationwide, and 

from selected social entrepreneurship literature.  

 

Selected Project Goal 

A - Lijjat Sisters To provide financial support empowering women who aim to 

achieve their independence and want to be integrated into the 

labour market. 

B - Refood To stimulate the fight against food waste through tracking  

restaurant leftovers.  

C - Dress for Success To integrate women socially and professionally by strengthening 

their self-esteem. 

D - WOW – Word of Woman To inspire others and spread experiences, histories, values and 

projects created by women. 

E - Reklusa To occupy, educate and reintegrate female inmates and former 

inmates socially and professionally. 

F - Manicómio To provide financial autonomy and break the stigma towards  

mentally ill patients. 

G - A avó veio trabalhar To fight against seniors’ isolation and promote active senior ageing. 

 

Table 1: Selected case study projects. 

 

The case studies analysis is summarized through a table that includes details of the parameters, followed  

by critical reflection that cross-references the data collected with the literature review. 

 

Case study analysis 

Each case study includes a brief description of the project and an analysis of the business model, public 

funds dependency, beneficiaries’ engagement level and business sustainability/ longevity (Tables 2–8). 

Figures 2–8 are infographics that explain how the business model works. Figures 9 and 10 compare the 

difference in the set parameters within the sample. 



 

101 

 

Case study A, the Lijjat Sisters project, recruits Indian women who, due to their low social status (Indian 

caste system), are unable to find a job to provide financially for their own families. Lijjat Sisters recruits and 

integrates them, providing a job; thus, the women end up being socially integrated and having the 

possibility of being financially autonomous. 

 

In this project, every employee receives profits from the generated sales of the papad snack. 

 

Case A: Lijjat Sisters 

Business model Recruitment and professional involvement of Indian women, who are 

responsible for producing and selling traditional papad snacks. The profit from 

sales is distributed equally amongst all the collaborators no matter the tasks they 

perform within the project.  

Public funding 

dependency 

None. 

Beneficiary 

involvement level   

Quadrant D: extensive beneficiary participation in the management  

and production.  

Business 

sustainability  

The Lijjat Sisters began in 1959 with seven collaborators. After 50 years, this 

number increased to 42, and their turnover reached 111 million dollars. The 

value chain is considered the top reason for a business’s longevity.  

Table 2: Case Study A – Lijjat Sisters. 

 



 

102 

 
 

Figure 2: Lijjat Sisters’ business model. Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 

 

Refood fights food waste and directs meals from local restaurants to people in need through partnerships 

established between Refood, a chain of local Portuguese restaurants, and volunteers who distribute the 

meals in the cities where the project is active. 

 

 

 

 



 

103 

 

Case B: Refood  

Business model Refood depends 100% on volunteers, does not generate any profit and is 

managed by an executive committee. The value chain is considered vulnerable 

because it depends on volunteers, government funding and donations. The 

switch of authority from the collecting units may compromise the project’s 

quality and credibility. The business model is an example of how the use of 

different management tools, namely human resources, are capable of  

effectively fighting a problem.  

Public funding 

dependency 

Yes 

Beneficiary 

involvement level   

Quadrant A: based on social assistance, the beneficiaries are only served by the 

Social Initiative Project Manager; Quadrant: the beneficiaries are involved in the 

project concept and design. 

Business 

sustainability  

Refood has been growing since 2011. It started with one pickup for the shipping 

and distribution. In the beginning, it served 34 beneficiaries with only one 

volunteer. By 2020, this had increased to 25 pickup vans and 4000 volunteers. 

 

Table 3: Case Study B – Refood. 

 

 



 

104 

 
 

Figure 3: Refood’s business model. Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 



 

105 

Dress for success empowers women to enable them to enter the job-hunting market by providing fashion 

advice and preparing women for job interviews. 

 

Case C: Dress for Success 

Business model The Dress for Success business model depends financially on 

patronage. Image consultants and professional agents develop  

their activities near to the beneficiary women identified by  

other institutions. 

Public funding dependency None. 

Beneficiary involvement 

level 

Quadrant A: based on welfare, the beneficiaries are only served  

by the project. 

Business sustainability  This Portuguese case was founded in 2012 and is still active. 

 

Table 4: Case Study C - Dress for Success. 

 



 

106 

 

Figure 4: Dress for Success business’ model. Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 

 

 



 

107 

Word of Woman provides marketing and management consulting services to women entrepreneurs.  

They work directly with women in order to boost their entrepreneurial capacities. 

 

Case D: Word of Woman 

Business model WOW works directly with their beneficiaries, providing marketing 
and communication services. To keep the business model active and 
robust, WOW depends only on its collaborators. 

Public funding dependency None. 

Beneficiary involvement level   Quadrant A: based on welfare, the beneficiaries are only served  
by the project manager. 

Business sustainability  Active since 2013.  

 

Table 5: Case Study D – WOW 

 



 

108 

 

Figure 5: WOW’s business model. Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 



 

109 

The Reklusa project aims to provide female prison inmates with craft skills, financial income and social 

integration after prison time. Through partnerships with designers, jewellery pieces and fashion accessories 

are developed and produced in a partnership with Tires prison. A percentage of the product sales is 

allocated to the inmates. After they leave the prison, they assume functions within the project, such as 

sales or manufacturing. 

 

Case E: Reklusa 

Business model Reklusa’s business model is based on a partnership with Tires prison. The 

product design is developed outside the prison and then sent to the prison 

to be developed manually by the inmates. The final products are sold at the 

Reklusa shop. A percentage of sales is collected to be included in a financial 

fund for the prisoners. The remaining amount is for the trademark. 

Public funding 

dependency 

None. 

Beneficiary 

involvement level   

Quadrant C: This involves co-production of the project’s gathering value. 
The beneficiaries dedicate their time and knowledge towards the project.  

Business 

sustainability  

The project started in 2013. The lack of government support and no 
involvement by other associated partners, such as Tires Prison, caused its end 
in 2018. The project is no longer active.  

 

Table 6: Case Study E – Reklusa. 



 

110 

 

Figure 6: Reklusa’s business model.  

Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 

 

Manicómio provides a space for individuals with diagnosed mental illness to express themselves 

through art. Manicómio offers a scholarship for the beneficiaries and acts as an intermediary 

with national and international art dealers. A percentage of the sales goes to the resident artists. 

They have also held art workshops for members of the public who are interested in learning 

different types of arts and crafts. A percentage of the workshop revenue also goes to the 

resident artists. 

  



 

111 

Case F: Manicómio 

Business model Manicómio is based in an art gallery space that actively encourages artistic work 

by people diagnosed with mental illness. Two founders guarantee to assure the 

project’s management. All the created work is developed by the beneficiaries. 

They are supported by sponsorship, which includes meals, transport and a salary. 

In addition, the peoples’ salaries come from 70% of their artwork sales and 90% 

from the workshops promoted by them. 

Sometimes, partnerships with well-known designers contribute with private-label 

products for Manicómio’s clients. In this case, the income amount is shared 

amongst the project and the involved artists. Medical clinics are also involved 

partners for the artists as an income source near the community that provides 

low-cost medical services in their space.  

Public funding 

dependency 

Yes. 

Beneficiary 

involvement level   

Quadrant C: there is co-production from the value achieved. The beneficiaries 
dedicate their time and knowledge towards the project. 

Business 

sustainability  
Active since 2019.  

 

Table 7: Manicómio case study. 

 



 

112 

 

Figure 7: Manicómio ‘s Business Model.  

Illustrated by Fernando Vieira. 

 

A avó veio trabalhar is a project that fights senior isolation by providing a communal space for elderly to 

develop work in sewing workshops, knitting and embroidery. They also participate in video clips and photo 

sessions. The revenue from sales and other activities goes to the project itself and is allocated to buy 

experiences for the elderly people, such as travelling or attending cultural events. 

 

  



 

113 

Case G: A Avó veio trabalhar 

Business model The project’s goal is to fight against senior isolation by promoting an 

active senior age. It provides services to trademarks, partners and 

individuals. The income is reinvested in the project and in the ‘grannies’ 

community’, offering them travel and other unique experiences. The 

project management is guaranteed by the two founders. However, the 

grannies are always consulted before any decision is taken. 

The grannies’ services are diverse: sewing workshops, knitting and  

embroidery, they also participate in video clips, photo sessions, develop 

pieces for trademarks, partners and artists, and develop objects  

for their mark selling. 

Public funding 

dependency 

None. 

Beneficiary 

involvement level   

Quadrant C: there is co-production of the value achieved by the 
project. The beneficiaries dedicate their time and knowledge towards 
the project.  

Business sustainability  Active since 2014. 

 

Table 8: A Avó Veio Trabalhar case study. 

 

 



 

114 

 

Figure 8: A Avó veio trabalhar business model. Fernando Vieira‘s Illustration. 

 



 

115 

Results and discussion 

 

Business model 

The case studies presented in this article reveals distinct levels of complexity in how they plan to earn 

money or generate value with their product and customer base in a specific market. The Lijjat Sisters, 

Reklusa, Manicómio and Refood projects, for example, are those businesses whose models reveal issues  

of great complexity. The first seems to be the most solid. The success factors involved a debate about 

where they needed a generalized workforce and affordable production tools. The project is based on an 

entrepreneurial activity that generates income for all the involved collaborators. This is a flexible way for 

beneficiaries to constantly achieve financial autonomy. 

 

If we compare this action with the remaining sample projects, it seems like how a commercial enterprise 

works. The second one, Reklusa, had a business model like Lijjat Sisters’. They used human resources in 

vulnerable scenarios. It is considered social inclusion because it generated an income source for people 

recruited through a partnership with Tires prison that, however, lacked support and consolidation. 

Compared to the Lijjat Sisters’ case, Reklusa had the disadvantage of not owning the production tools.  

In the Lijjat Sisters’ case, as Thou (2012) claims, the beneficiaries became a crucial factor regarding the 

project’s sustainability. This is due to their engagement and how they are involved in establishing new 

strategies, goal metrics and even the total operationalization of the project. These factors contribute 

towards efficient monitoring and consequently towards the initiative’s sustainability. 

 

Manicómio has a business model based on the free provision of space where art pieces are created.  

It acts as an intermediary for art pieces nationally and internationally and is considered to have a complex 

business model due to the number of agents and partnerships involved. 

 

Refood’s business model is not easy to understand due to its organization. It has an executive committee 

that establishes the rules and goals for the existing units. Each unit is managed by a person who manages 

the volunteers, answering to their local beneficiaries’ demands. Unlike the other case studies, Refood’s 

business model can be implemented in other regions following its standard model. This approach is 

considered a success factor. However, their growth may also represent a higher dependence on private 

patrons, government funds and volunteers, which makes the project’s position more susceptible to political 

cycles. Although its business model is quite complex, it is also financially very vulnerable. This model is not 

sustained by Netto (2013), who claims that a kind of welfare-based model does not contribute to the 

eradication of inequalities, as it does not solve the structural problem of inequality but rather fights the 

immediate consequences of hunger. 

 

Dress for Success, Word of Woman and A avó veio trabalhar are the case studies that present the simplest 

business model. Dress for Success’s model depends on private patrons, partnerships and welfare practices. 

Its success factor directly links to an international network with plenty of organizations who provide 

financial support and partners. This allows the project to develop with few sustainability concerns. 

Compared to the other case studies, Dress for Success is the only project linked to a worldwide structure. 

The WOW network bases its business model on selling services and merchandising. It is independent of 

external partners for its activity development, operating only with its team’s knowledge. This can be 

recognised as a success factor. The WOW network similar to Dress for Success in that the approach level 

gives autonomy to the beneficiaries through supplying services. Dress for Success, WOW and A Avó veio 

Trabalhar, as models based on services, allow free income from outside, which differs to Lijjat Sisters, 

where all the resources are invested into the project and not distributed amongst the beneficiaries.  



 

116 

In both A Avó veio Trabalhar and Manicómio, one considers a success factor to be hosting the beneficiaries 

in a structure that develops manual work. 

 

Involvement level 

The case studies of Lijjat Sisters, Reklusa, Manicomio and A Avó veio Trabalhar present high levels of 

beneficiary involvement. Lijjat Sisters presents the highest involvement level from the projects’ 

beneficiaries (Quadrant D). This project works as a closed group, where entrepreneurs/ beneficiaries are 

those who decide on the business, and their production tools allow more efficient control of the value 

chain. This involvement level provides higher autonomy and financial sustainability to the beneficiaries 

involved. Within the sample, this is the only project where beneficiaries are autonomous towards the 

project management. According to Manzini (2015), this quadrant shows intense involvement from 

beneficiaries. 

 

Quadrant C is found in the Reklusa, Manicómio and A Avó veio Trabalhar case studies, where the 

beneficiaries participate actively. From this group, A Avó veio Trabalhar is the only one where people  

co-produce value within the project, but they do not receive any financial income. Curiously, those cases 

which present the highest involvement level frequently have their beneficiaries doing manual work, such  

as artwork, sewing, embroidery or cooking. 

 

The cases with the lowest involvement level are Refood, Dress for Success and Word of Woman. Refood’s 

beneficiaries have a low involvement level towards the initiative. They only serve and work as a consultant 

regarding the project’s implementation. In this case, the involvement quadrant is between A and B. 

 

Dress for Success represents an involvement condition from Quadrant A, i.e. low beneficiary participation in 

the project. This may be due to the level of fashion expertise and knowledge needed for managing and 

operating within the initiative. Quadrant A represents the lowest involvement level from the beneficiary 

perspective. Dress for Success and Refood provide a service that contributes directly to the beneficiaries’ 

wellbeing and autonomy. The Word of Woman project also reveals a similar scenario to Dress for Success: 

both depend on expertise for the mission’s development. 

 

Public funding 

From the studied sample, Refood and Manicómio are those with the highest dependence on public funding. 

Refood depends on public funding for its ongoing initiatives. Therefore, this project is more vulnerable to 

political and economic cycles that may put at risk the beneficiaries who depend on the project. This 

approach reinforces the importance of choosing strategies that better involve beneficiaries’ life situations 

instead of following welfare practices (Thou, 2012). 

 

Manicómio depends on public funding for its development, which is justified by its target public – people 

diagnosed with mental illness. From the case studies presented, this is the only one where public funds 

focus only on the beneficiaries, who receive an income from their activities. 

 

With no reliance on public funds, Word of Woman, A Avó veio Trabalhar and Lijjat Sisters follow a different 

strategy. The WOW network and A Avó veio Trabalhar are determined only by the services they provide. 

Lijjat Sisters does not need any public funding, as the whole operation depends on the production and sale 

of papad snacks. Their independence in relation to the obtained incomes is suitable for a less  

vulnerable project. 

 



 

117 

From the studied sample, two cases differ from the remaining ones: Dress for Success and Reklusa. Dress 

for Success does not depend on public funding, as it belongs to a worldwide organization, thus ensuring the 

project’s subsistence. Reklusa did not depend on public funding but depended on a partnership with  

a public institution, Tires prison. This is why the project ended. 

 

Business sustainability/longevity 

The previously analysed parameters directly influence the project’s longevity. From the studied sample, 

Lijjat Sisters, Refood, Dress for Success, WOW, Manicómio, and A Avó veio Trabalhar are still active. Lijjat 

Sisters’ business model is the most robust, since this initiative has been active since 1959. Refood has been 

working and growing since 2010. During the COVID-19 pandemic, they were closed. Their dependence on 

restaurant network partnerships puts them at serious risk. Nevertheless, Refood is still active. Dress for 

Success (Portuguese branch) has the highest financial support, as the connection to the Dress for Success 

headquarters strengthens its longevity (Table 4). WOW has been active since 2013, and like Lijjat Sisters has 

its production tools. Both are cases with specialized knowledge that contributes towards more autonomy. 

Manicómio and A Avó veio Trabalhar are the most recent cases. They have been active since, 2019 and 

2014, respectively. 

 



 

118 

 
Figure 9: Case study comparative analysis 1/2. Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 

 



 

119 

 
Figure 10: Case study comparative analysis 2/2. Image credit: Fernando Vieira. 

 



 

120 

Conclusions 

The current context, particularly affected by the Covid-19 pandemic, has left exposed a set of communities 

disadvantaged in relation to health care access, food and housing, amongst others. This scenario has 

aggravated the overcharging of tools that assure a country’s welfare state. The subjects of management 

and entrepreneurship have become imperative to operate those tools more efficiently to fight against 

social inequalities. 

 

In answer to the question, What is the role of the beneficiary’s involvement as a critical success factor  

in the development of social innovation projects?, the literature review demonstrated the urgency in 

developing new intervention strategies without involving welfare practices. Otherwise, stimulating 

beneficiaries’ autonomy and  financial independence lead us to conclude that beneficiary involvement  

is a key factor establishing efficient and long-term strategies (Foley et al., n.d). Considering that, and 

reinforced by Netto (2013), the case studies demonstrated the importance of beneficiary involvement  

as a contribution towards decreasing social inequalities. 

 

However, according to the analysis of the sample, it is notable that in some initiatives, beneficiaries’ high 

involvement did not achieve the result of a planned social impact or even a situational change for the 

beneficiaries. Lijjat Sisters is the only studied initiative where the beneficiary is involved in the project and 

generates income directly for herself. In Reklusa and Manicómio, for example, there is also that possibility, 

although the generated incomes may not be enough for an individual to achieve financial autonomy. 

Interestingly, the A Avó veio Trabalhar project has an intense involvement level (Quadrant C), and its 

sustainability is assured by the active participation of the beneficiaries. They do not receive any sort of 

financial income, leading us to assume their financial situation allows that context. In this case, the social 

initiative aims to fight against elderly loneliness and social exclusion, and the beneficiaries’ financial 

situation is not an issue. In the case of Manicómio, although the beneficiaries have an income, they depend 

on sponsorship enabling them to focus on their artistic work. Once again, the involvement level is high and 

the beneficiaries co-produce value in the project. All of them depend on the welfare state mechanism to 

participate in the project. 

 

Manzini’s involvement framework assumes high importance in this study. He argues that an intense level  

of involvement shows greater benefits for social impact projects and therefore for beneficiaries (Manzini, 

2015). For the authors of this article, Manzini’s premise is not so linear, however. As seen in some of the 

case studies, such as Manicómio, A Avó veio trabalhar and Reklusa, a higher involvement level of the 

beneficiary does not result in a life-changing situation for the beneficiaries. Manicómio and Reklusa still rely 

on public funding to fight against social inequalities. A Avó veio trabalhar allows an intense level of 

involvement because there are socio-economic factors that contribute to this situation. This means that the 

articulation between intensive involvement where value to the project is co-produced and public funding 

supporting the cost of the projects allows their self-sufficiency and results in great benefit for  

the beneficiaries. 

 

The opposite scenario of Manzini’s discourse is apparent in the Refood initiative, which presents a very low 

level of involvement from the beneficiaries, which is not advocated by Manzini (2015) or Netto (2013). It 

entails welfare, which according to Netto (2013) is a practice that does not contribute to the eradication of 

the social problem. However, the work they do is pertinent and urgent, due to the beneficiaries’ precarious 

situation. These two cases demonstrate that a more intense involvement level may not always occur. 

Autonomy and financial independence may not always happen, no matter the involvement level. 

 



 

121 

The welfare state is a way of protecting beneficiaries. They do not have any financial subsistence in an 

assumption labelled by market economies. Lijjat Sisters refers to fighting social inequalities. However,  

it is focused on an enterprise initiative or cooperative entrepreneurship. The social impact occurs during 

business development. The Reklusa case study demonstrated a business model based on a public 

partnership, intending to integrate and educate inmates. The literature review showed that the taxes which 

are tools of a welfare state demand the adoption of new approaches since welfare practices do not work 

(Netto, 2013). Initiatives like Manicómio show that beneficiaries’ autonomy can be achieved, starting from 

a point of view where financial independence exists through sponsorship income, demonstrating that in 

some cases it is necessary to adopt welfare practices. 

 

The reflections in this conclusion lead to the following questions: the first relatesto the beneficiaries’ 

involvement and the second to model development to effectively integrate different actors in a successful 

social initiative: 1) How can one profit better from beneficiaries’ competencies and capacity contributing 

positively towards a more successful social impact project? 2) What characteristics must a social 

entrepreneurship model have to effectively identify beneficiaries’ needs, involved contexts and their 

development models? This last question comes as a clue for future thinking/development, hoping to 

contribute towards successful social initiatives and respective beneficiaries. 

 

References 

Bahmani, S., Galindo, M., & Méndez, M.T. (2012). Non-profit organizations, entrepreneurship, social capital, 
and economic growth. Small Bus Econ, 38, 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-010-9274-7 
 
Dress for Success (2021). https://lisbon.dressforsuccess.org 
 
Foley, E., Lithur, N. O., Nimo- Ampredu, C., & Abbey, W. (n.d.). Beneficiary participation and its impact on 
effective social protection programming. Ghana Inclusive Development Research Network. 
https://www.gidrn.com/docs/GIRDN_Report_09.pdf 
 
Franco, R. C. (2015). Diagnóstico das organizações não governamentais em Portugal. Universidade Católica 
Portuguesa; Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. 
 
Kinyata, G. S., & Abiodun, N. L. (2020). The impact of community participation on projects’ success in Africa: 
A bottom up approach. International Journal of Research in Sociology and Anthropology, 6(3), 1–8. 
https://doi.org/10.20431/2454-8677.0603001 
 
Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation.  
The MIT Press. 
 
Mapa de inovação e empreendedorismo social (n.d.), Mapa de inovação e empreendedorismo social 
interativo. https://e-social.pt 
 
Netto, J. P. (2013). Assistencialismo e regressividade profissional no serviço social. Intervenção social,  
41, 11–35. http://hdl.handle.net/11067/1075 
 
Patel, S., & Mehta, K. (2011). Life’s principles as a framework for designing successful social enterprises. 
Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 2 (1), 218–230. 
 
Re-food (2021). http://www.re-food.org/pt 
 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-010-9274-7
https://lisbon.dressforsuccess.org/
https://doi.org/10.20431/2454-8677.0603001
http://www.re-food.org/pt


 

122 

Tomás, A. (2020). Manicómio - O projeto Português onde a arte desconstrói a doença mental. Contacto 
online, Feb. https://www.wort.lu/pt/portugal/manic-mio-o-projeto-portugues-onde-a-arte-desconstr-i-a-
doenca-mental-5e50237fda2cc1784e356acc 
 
Thou, Agatha W. (2012). The effect of beneficiary participation on project monitoring and evaluation: the 
case of Kenya Agricultural Productivity Project, Nyandarua district. [Master’s thesis, Department of Business 
Administration, Kenyatta University, Kenya. 
 


	Pedro Sancho, Rute Gomes, Cláudia Pernencar
	Published online: October 2021
	Pedro Sanchoa, Rute Gomesb, Cláudia Pernencar c, d
	Abstract Social inequalities are increasing the initiatives in which the provident state is requested to find solutions and tools to improve the social impact. In this perspective, the management and entrepreneurship fields assume a huge relevance in ...
	Abstract Social inequalities are increasing the initiatives in which the provident state is requested to find solutions and tools to improve the social impact. In this perspective, the management and entrepreneurship fields assume a huge relevance in ...
	Keywords: Beneficiaries’ involvement, Design for social change, Social entrepreneurship, Social inequalities, Sustainable development
	Keywords: Beneficiaries’ involvement, Design for social change, Social entrepreneurship, Social inequalities, Sustainable development
	Literature review
	Figure 1:  Beneficiaries’ involvement quadrants in social innovation projects.  Source: Manzini (2015, p. 107), Fernando Vieira’s illustration.

	Methods and materials
	Tool - case studies comparative table
	Sample selection
	Table 1: Selected case study projects.


	Case study analysis
	Table 2: Case Study A – Lijjat Sisters.
	Table 3: Case Study B – Refood.
	Table 4: Case Study C - Dress for Success.
	Figure 4: Dress for Success business’ model. Image credit: Fernando Vieira.
	Table 5: Case Study D – WOW
	Figure 5: WOW’s business model. Image credit: Fernando Vieira.
	Table 6: Case Study E – Reklusa.
	Figure 6: Reklusa’s business model.
	Image credit: Fernando Vieira.
	Manicómio provides a space for individuals with diagnosed mental illness to express themselves through art. Manicómio offers a scholarship for the beneficiaries and acts as an intermediary with national and international art dealers. A percentage of t...
	Table 7: Manicómio case study.
	Table 8: A Avó Veio Trabalhar case study.


	Results and discussion
	Business model
	Involvement level
	Public funding
	Business sustainability/longevity

	Conclusions
	References

