Lack of access to feedback sources

My analysis revealed that feedback seeking required resources due to lack of access to feedback sources. The entrepreneurs deemed feedback seeking difficult because they had limited or no access to perceived appropriate feedback sources. They considered that their access to feedback sources was constrained by four

characteristics related to their ventures or related to themselves: the nature of the venture, the nature of the beneficiaries, the

entrepreneurs’ social networks, and physical proximity to appropriate feedback sources.

First, my analysis revealed that the nature of the venture limited access to feedback sources for entrepreneurs. Many of the

entrepreneurs did not have individuals who closely worked with them on a regular basis, such as co-founders, employees, volunteers or collaborators. They often worked alone and could not easily ask for feedback when needed. They made comparisons with their previous or other jobs and how easy it was to ask for feedback when there was an immediate group of people they worked with closely on a regular basis. They reflected that seekingfeedback when part of a team was opportune, while as an entrepreneur it was an effort. In the words of Natalie:

As a university lecturer we get feedback all the time either from students or peers and I ask for feedback all the time on problem solving and it is immediate there. Those people are around me everyday and I can always ask them. So it is not that I am opposed to feedback or can't take it. I can. It is just that at the moment I am not surrounded by the right people, or any people really, to give me feedback.

Second, my analysis revealed that the nature of the

beneficiaries limited access to feedback sources for entrepreneurs. A few entrepreneurs served isolated and hard-to-reach

socio-demographic groups. This included groups who were traditionally not very engaged in their communities or public life more generally (e.g.

unemployed men over 50) and groups who were stigmatised and traditionally have not had a voice. These groups were perceived not to respond to feedback requests often. This challenge was most

clearly addressed by Dominic and his attempts to gain feedback from families of prisoners:

Some people are quite isolated and they really struggle to come forward so what we say is "You get to have a say and all these other families can benefit from comments." But many don't come forward because they feel stigmatised walking through the door. The hardest part is getting feedback from families about previous experience with imprisonment in the family. That is a challenge. We've had only a little bit from less than 10 people so far from those events […] Prisoners' families are notoriously hard, difficult group to engage and they tend to go public on the topic very rarely because of the stigma.

Third, my analysis revealed that the social networks of the entrepreneurs limited their access to feedback sources.

Entrepreneurs perceived the lack of “appropriate” networks in which to find individuals to ask for feedback as a significant challenge to seeking feedback. For some entrepreneurs, this meant the lack of access to business professionals or other social entrepreneurs. Many of the social entrepreneurs reflected that they did not know other social entrepreneurs or “didn't start with a business network or a professional network at all” (Andrew). As Yvette summarised: “I don’t work in those circles.” For other entrepreneurs, this lack of

“appropriate” networks was created by the unique aspects of the venture which posed limitations on whom the entrepreneurs

considered to be a credible feedback source. This was the case of Peter who perceived that his problem gambling consultancy was very niche, which limited whom he could go to for feedback: “You know there isn't [sic] that many people with gambling addictions that I know.”

Fourth, my analysis revealed that physical proximity shaped and limited access to feedback sources for entrepreneurs. Physical proximity played an important role in determining from whom to seek feedback and when to refrain from it. When entrepreneurs had close contact with feedback sources, they sought more feedback from those individuals than from more distant feedback sources. For example, the proximity of employees and the day-to-day service delivery made it easier for entrepreneurs to seek feedback from their

teams and beneficiaries than to seek feedback from customers or other more distant groups with whom they had less frequent contact.

Brandon’s experience was indicative of how physical proximity shaped access to feedback sources by making it easier to seek feedback from some individuals than from others:

The point is when I wake up... I wake up and think about balancing these things [seeking feedback from different sources] on a daily basis but I get to the office and my staff is there and I have only so much time so I focus on them instead of the clients.

The lack of physical proximity limited access to feedback sources. Entrepreneurs perceived that seeking feedback from feedback sources who were distant and remote was more

challenging. It required more time, effort, and energy compared to seeking feedback from feedback sources who were physically closer.

This was the case with different types of feedback sources. For example, some entrepreneurs had remote teams and the lack of proximity required them to exert more effort to seek feedback from employees because there were no opportunities for naturally occurring conversations and feedback interactions. Other social entrepreneurs struggled with access to social entrepreneurs as feedback sources. For example, some entrepreneurs lived and worked in less urban environments and experienced difficulties in finding other social entrepreneurs in their areas. They had had very positive feedback interactions from large social entrepreneurship conferences and events in London or other big cities and wanted to attend more of those events. However, that required travelling time which was difficult to allocate. This was a significant challenge for entrepreneurs who had other part- or full-time jobs or personal responsibilities, such as childcare. Referring to a large social

entrepreneurship meeting in London, Jennifer from Lincoln reflected:

I just don't get round to doing it often enough because of my job and working on getting the business off the ground. […] I'd like to do it again, but the meetings are a long way away and there is so much going on so I just can't make it.