3. RESEARCH QUESTION &
OBJECTIVES
“Can crowdfunding technology provide a
commercially viable solution for social
value generation in the context of UK
universities?”
4. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Lack of Funds:
Government Policies and
Regulations
Lack of Volunteers and Retention
Issues
Lack of Leadership
Lack of Recognition
Number of Respondents
Top 5 Main Constraints in Social Enterprise Development.
Adapted from Hopkins (2010, p.28).
5. -Need for additional funding?
-Application of crowdfunding
technology?
-Donor interest?
-Best model?
-Best monetisation pattern?
-Commercial viability?
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
10. 1. NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING
-Findings have been (overall)
consistent with the literature review.
-4 out of 6 respondents have
indicated some level of need for
additional funding.
-2 out of 6 respondents have been
appeased by current levels of funding.
11. 2. APPLICATION OF
CROWDFUNDING
-4 out of 6 respondents have
indicated willingness to use
crowdfunding for their fundraising
needs.
-Highest levels of willingness
displayed by 2 out of 6 respondents,
who have considered fundraising as a
source of funding in the past.
12. 3. DONOR WILLINGNESS
-Majority of donors willing to use a
specialised crowdfunding platform.
-Social media platforms play a
significant role in fund solicitation,
which is consistent with the literature
13. 4. BEST MODEL
-Overall consistent with the literature,
the study has identified an optional
reward-based model (a form of a
hybrid model) as the most suitable
platform design.
-The study has identified a number of
elements not reflected in the literature
review.
14. 5. BEST COMMERCIALISATION
PATTERN
-The study has identified a
combination of brokerage fee and
online shop commercialisation
patterns as an optimal choice.
-Offline fundraising has been selected
as a model differentiator.
