Next Article in Journal
The Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems in Tourism and Hospitality: The Tourists’ Perspective
Previous Article in Journal
Gen Z Employee Adaptive Performance: The Role of Inclusive Leadership and Workplace Happiness
Previous Article in Special Issue
Rebuilding the Workplace in the Post-Pandemic Age through Human Capital Development Programs: A Moderated Mediation Model
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Exploring Shared Challenges of Empowered Patients and Entrepreneurs: Towards Diversity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship in Post-Crisis Contexts

by
Marisol Hurtado Illanes
Departament d’Organització d’Empreses, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 08034 Barcelona, Spain
Adm. Sci. 2024, 14(8), 164; https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14080164
Submission received: 15 May 2024 / Revised: 22 July 2024 / Accepted: 23 July 2024 / Published: 31 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diversity, Innovations, and Entrepreneurship in Post-crisis Periods)

Abstract

:
This practical study explores the shared challenges faced by individuals managing chronic health conditions and entrepreneurs within the context of post-crisis periods, focusing on diversity, innovation, and individual empowerment. The aim is to develop a theoretical framework elucidating the mechanisms behind these challenges and their implications for fostering diversity, social innovation, and sustainability. Methodologically, an integrative approach was employed, drawing upon insights from psychology, sociology, health management, and entrepreneurship literature to conduct a comprehensive analysis. The research utilized mixed methods, including scoping reviews and qualitative analysis of virtual communities, to uncover the dynamic mechanisms that drive empowerment. This approach not only validated the theoretical framework but also proposed practical strategies to harness diversity, innovation, and entrepreneurship in post-crisis contexts. Drawing upon Dubin’s methodology, the study structured the theoretical framework to highlight the interconnectedness of empowerment experiences within communities. The findings underscore the interconnectedness of empowerment experiences within communities and highlight the vital role of collaborative environments and support networks in promoting diversity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Ultimately, this research contributes to the development of strategies that capitalize on cultural diversities and reap the benefits of different nationalities, knowledge areas, and cultures, particularly in the aftermath of crises.

1. Introduction

Understanding the dynamics of personal and community empowerment is crucial across various fields, particularly in the post-COVID-19 era, encompassing domains such as entrepreneurship and health. The global pandemic has significantly disrupted both personal health management and entrepreneurial activities, necessitating swift adaptation to rapidly evolving circumstances. In response, these domains are undergoing profound transformations, with empowered individuals playing pivotal roles as catalysts for change and innovation. To comprehensively assess their social impact, it is imperative to grasp both the commonalities and unique challenges they encounter within their respective domains.
Empowered individuals, including workers, demonstrate remarkable adaptability in overcoming abrupt obstacles (Bouzakhem et al. 2023). The principles of empowerment, characterized by autonomy and resilience, serve as guiding frameworks for navigating uncertainty and adversity. They form a shared foundation for empowered patients and entrepreneurs alike, aligning with sustainable development goals aimed at enhancing overall well-being and communal benefits (Nicolopoulou et al. 2017; Rashid 2019).
Recent research underscores the interconnectedness of factors shaping empowerment, emphasizing the necessity of integrated approaches (Belitski et al. 2021). Understanding these dynamics provides valuable insights into developing empowerment processes in digital environments like virtual communities, thereby enriching the broader discourse on empowerment with new avenues for diversity and innovation (Chandna and Salimath 2020; Smithson et al. 2021; Zaheer et al. 2019; Ridings and Gefen 2004; Bocquet et al. 2019). Understanding interconnected empowerment provides insights into addressing common challenges in health management and entrepreneurship, promoting collaborative innovation environments for transformative progress (Carayannis et al. 2022) and fostering inclusive development (Snow et al. 2017; Frost and Massagli 2008).
A fundamental divide exists between developers and degrowthers regarding the role of technology and entrepreneurship in society. Developers advocate for technological advancement and private entrepreneurial initiatives as essential for empowerment, sustainable development, and economic growth. Conversely, degrowthers’ caution against the potential negative impacts of rapid technological change, advocating for public intervention and a measured approach to ensure equitable and sustainable development. This research integrates both perspectives, focusing on empowering individuals and communities to advocate for their needs, crucial for reducing inequalities and promoting equitable and sustainable development. The Australian Digital Inclusion Index (ADII) highlights the ongoing challenges and disparities in digital access, underscoring the need for responsible use of technology to bridge the digital divide (Wilson et al. 2019). Thus, knowledge becomes a pivotal tool for the responsible use of technology, mitigating its adverse effects (Sánchez-Bayón et al. 2024).
This paper seeks to address ongoing research gaps in understanding empowerment dynamics (Rissel 1994; Fumagalli et al. 2015; Wood et al. 2021). The absence of a clear definition complicates the comparative understanding. Fostering collaborative endeavors in the dynamic scope of health management, entrepreneurship, and technology between patient and entrepreneur communities is imperative, with a focus on promoting human welfare, inclusive growth and economic advancement (Wadichar et al. 2024; Julius Onakoya and Babatunde 2013; Fattah et al. 2021). The existing literature emphasizes how entrepreneurship programs empower marginalized groups (Balcazar et al. 2014). This study shifts focus towards understanding challenges hindering sustainable well-being and social innovation, extending beyond entrepreneurship solely for environmental conservation (Muñoz and Cohen 2018). Additionally, there’s a lack of comparative studies exploring the characteristics of both Personal Health Management (PHM) and entrepreneurial domains. Limited progress has been made in another approach, which explores entrepreneurial dynamics in the development of new health services (Sindakis and Kitsios 2016). Thus, persistent research gaps remain in addressing challenges faced by empowered individuals.
Empowerment dynamics are crucial for enhancing personal well-being and driving social innovation. Despite their significance, current research often lacks a unified approach to comprehensively understanding these dynamics across various domains.
Essential questions are addressed in this paper:
  • What shared challenges do chronic patients and entrepreneurs encounter, and how are these challenges addressed to empower them?
  • What are the fundamental mechanisms contributing to the empowerment of patients and entrepreneurs, and how do these mechanisms intersect within their communities?
This study seeks to address this gap by developing a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding individual empowerment mechanisms, validated through qualitative research. Leveraging Dubin’s methodology and adopting a transdisciplinary approach, the framework aims to enrich the literature on empowerment by illustrating how diverse factors interconnect to strengthen individuals across different spheres (Dubin 1978).
By comprehensively exploring these shared challenges, this study not only seeks to clarify the mechanisms of empowerment within communities but also aims to provide actionable insights for promoting diversity, social innovation, and sustainability in practical contexts. This approach integrates insights from management sciences and individual empowerment, advocating for interdisciplinary knowledge exchange to enhance personal well-being and foster social innovation. Key stages such as Individual Empowerment, Engagement, Community Development, and Sustainable Practices have been highlighted (Blaique et al. 2023; Snowden et al. 2016), aligning with Sustainable Development Goals and emphasizing the importance of strategic, diverse, and collaborative approaches (Tang et al. 2021).
This research paper is structured as follows: Section 2 reviews the theoretical background and related literature on empowerment dynamics in entrepreneurship and health. Section 3 describes the methodology used for data collection and analysis. Section 4 presents the analysis and results of the study, providing actionable insights for practitioners in health and entrepreneurship. Section 5 introduces the theoretical framework, emphasizing the integrated essence of empowerment and its various components. Section 6 discusses the implications of the results for both academic research and practical applications. Finally, Section 7 provides conclusions, acknowledges the limitations of the study, and suggests directions for future research.

2. Theoretical Background

Broader definitions, primarily from psychology, conceptualize empowerment as the process of enabling individuals to assert control over their lives and navigate complex circumstances, influenced by factors such as motivation, opportunities, environmental influences, and self-belief (Zimmerman 1995; Perkins and Zimmerman 1995; Lorig and Holman 2003; Rappaport 1995). These elements collectively promote psychological well-being and resilience, which are crucial for fostering sustainable well-being and social innovation (Zautra et al. 2010; Diener 2012).

2.1. Entrepreneurship Background

Entrepreneurship research underscores the pivotal role of knowledge management, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and human capital in catalyzing the success of enterprises (Belitski et al. 2021; Luthans and Ibrayeva 2006; Unger et al. 2011). These factors play a crucial role in shaping entrepreneurial ecosystems and fostering resilience in post-crisis contexts. The concept of Individual Empowerment is central to this exploration, emphasizing self-efficacy, autonomy, and self-determination (Maynard et al. 2012). Empowerment and entrepreneurship can mutually influence each other, creating a dynamic interplay that fosters innovation and adaptability (Henao-Zapata and Peiró 2018).
Additionally, Individual Engagement within entrepreneurial ecosystems emerges as a critical factor, with individuals actively participating in communal initiatives and contributing to collective endeavors supported by social capital and networks (Okojie et al. 2023; Stam 2015). Community Development thrives on collaboration, emphasizing collective action and its impact on infrastructure and well-being (Audretsch and Lehmann 2006).
Sustainable Practices, a key component of the entrepreneurial landscape, advocate for environmental, social, and economic sustainability by promoting responsible resource management, ethical business practices, and equitable wealth distribution, thereby fostering empowerment and collective well-being in the digital age (Belitski and Heron 2017; Acs and Sussan 2017). Supportive elements in the ecosystem, guided by social capital theory, shape its dynamics (Salimi 2022; Theodoraki et al. 2018; Mason and Brown 2014). These practices are essential for fostering long-term growth and resilience, reinforcing the importance of sustainable development in post-crisis contexts.
The key themes of empowerment and their social implications for sustainability are summarized in Table 1.

2.2. Empowerment Foundations

Empowerment foundations, including self-efficacy, social support, collaboration, and education, are fundamental to the empowerment process. These elements collectively promote autonomy, self-determination, and awareness, providing individuals with tools to navigate challenges and foster personal growth (Kabeer 1999; Cohen and Wills 1985).

2.2.1. Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy, emphasized by Bandura’s theory, underpins individuals’ beliefs in their abilities, crucial for decision-making and resilience (Luthans and Youssef-Morgan 2017; Hood and Young 1993; Bandura 1997). It fosters perseverance, effectiveness, and well-being, shaping traits like grit and motivation, essential for success in various domains (Dweck 2006; Duckworth et al. 2007; Hemingway 2005).

2.2.2. Social Support

Social support, encompassing interpersonal and community networks, influences well-being and empowerment (Bandura 2001; Thoits 2011). These connections cultivate trust, provide emotional support, and foster resilience (Aujoulat et al. 2007; Frost and Massagli 2008; Zahra and Wright 2016). Additionally, community networks foster inclusion, innovation, and social change (Castells 2000; Zheng and Walsham 2008; Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Hurtado Illanes 2019).

2.2.3. Collaboration and Cooperation

Effective collaboration among community members is essential for development, leveraging diverse perspectives and resources to address challenges and achieve shared goals (Coleman 2009; Spigel 2017). These networks provide encouragement and guidance, fostering the exchange of knowledge, skills, and resources among members (Adler and Kwon 2002; Putnam 2000; Israel et al. 1994; Nowell and Boyd 2014). Collaborative spaces promote knowledge exchange and innovation, which are crucial for societal advancement (Wenger 2010; Wenger et al. 2002). The integration of collaborative efforts among stakeholders is crucial for social advancement (Pigg 2002). Recognizing individuals’ potential for innovation, inclusive environments promote empowerment by leveraging human capital (Amabile 2018).

2.2.4. Education

Educational institutions foster entrepreneurship by nurturing innovation, skills, and conducive ecosystems for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and education encompass individuals’ understanding of their circumstances, options, and opportunities. Self-efficacy enhances this by promoting confidence, resilience, goal-directed behavior, and self-regulated learning (Hibbard and Greene 2013). Individuals with high self-efficacy confidently pursue their educational goals, make informed decisions, and assert their autonomy, believing in their capacity to acquire knowledge and skills (Sitaridis and Kitsios 2024).

2.3. Empowerment Factors

Empowerment factors are individual characteristics or attributes that contribute directly to an individual’s sense of empowerment. These factors provide tangible expressions of empowerment, contributing to individual success and community thriving.

2.3.1. Autonomy and Self-Determination

Autonomy provides the foundation for self-determination by granting individuals the freedom and independence to make decisions aligned with their own values and preferences (Mays et al. 2023). Self-determination, in turn, enhances autonomy by fostering a sense of agency, initiative, and personal control over one’s life circumstances (Sen 2017). Individuals who are self-determined are more likely to assert their autonomy and make choices that reflect their authentic selves (Zhang 2019; Ryan and Deci 2000).

2.3.2. Active Participation and Engagement

Social support serves as a foundational element that nurtures active participation and engagement by providing individuals with the necessary support, resources, and encouragement to take part in meaningful activities and become fully engaged in their endeavors. Social support represents networks crucial in empowering individuals and enhancing resilience, resourcefulness, and capacity for success (Cohen and Wills 1985; Holt-Lunstad et al. 2010).

2.3.3. Collective Action

Collective action mobilizes community resources to address common challenges, emphasizing equitable resource access and ensuring all community members can effectively participate in development initiatives (Bacq et al. 2022).

2.3.4. Opportunities and Innovation

Opportunities are closely intertwined with innovation, driving personal and community growth and enabling the identification and implementation of inventive solutions (Hartzler and Pratt 2011; Meshram and Rawani 2019). These elements, opportunities, and innovation synergistically act as driving factors, empowering individuals and communities to identify and seize new opportunities, implement inventive solutions, and adapt to evolving circumstances (Liguori and Winkler 2020; Teece et al. 1997; Eisenhardt and Martin 2000). Affording opportunities to community members is vital for active participation in developmental endeavors (Putnam 2000).
These foundational elements and factors facilitate understanding and address shared challenges, fostering sustainable well-being and economic advancement (Wigger and Shepherd 2020; Storper 2005).

2.4. Empowerment in Personal Health Management and Entrepreneurship

Foundational factors such as self-efficacy and social support are foundational to addressing challenges in PHM and entrepreneurship. These elements significantly influence individuals’ abilities to navigate health decisions effectively and pursue entrepreneurial ventures with confidence (Acuña Mora et al. 2022; Small et al. 2013; Korber and McNaughton 2018; Henao-Zapata and Peiró 2018). Moreover, human capital, comprising knowledge, skills, and networks, plays a vital role in this process (Becker 1964).
Empowerment promotes autonomy and personal growth, yielding improved health outcomes for patients and driving innovation and socioeconomic progress for entrepreneurs (Nambisan and Baron 2013; Anderson and Funnell 2010). Investing in empowerment supports holistic well-being and sustainable development, benefiting individuals diversity in various forms and communities alike (Gurău and Dana 2018).

2.5. Empowerment through Human Capital and Intellectual Capital

Human capital, comprising knowledge and skills, plays a crucial role in entrepreneurial ecosystems by driving innovation and economic sustainability (Becker 1964; Nambisan and Baron 2013). Investments in human capital empower individuals for informed decision-making and fuel economic growth (Schultz 1961; De Bem Machado et al. 2022). Collaboration within entrepreneurial ecosystems fosters economic growth, community engagement, and well-being (Stam 2015). Creative knowledge and intellectual capital are indispensable for successful entrepreneurship, contributing to sustainable growth and environmental preservation (Von Krogh et al. 2012).
Enhancing human and intellectual capital within entrepreneurial ecosystems is crucial for driving innovation and ensuring economic sustainability (Viedma Martí and do Rosário Cabrita 2012, 2023). Individuals acquire intellectual capital through education and experience, enabling them to significantly contribute to economic advancement. Collectively, intellectual and human capital drive innovation, collaboration, wealth creation, and knowledge generation, which is essential for sustainable development and growth (Choo and Bontis 2002; Nahapiet and Ghoshal 2009; Shane and Venkataraman 2000; Hatch and Dyer 2004; Edvinsson and Sullivan 1996; Hart and Milstein 2003; Stewart 2007).
Social innovation involves devising and implementing novel solutions to address social challenges, thus enhancing human welfare and social impact (Toivonen 2016). Understanding the themes of empowerment and their social implications is pivotal for fostering sustainable practices (Panagioti et al. 2014) and opportunities driving economic progress (Nicolopoulou et al. 2017; Shepherd and Patzelt 2011).

2.6. Empowerment Through Knowledge-Based Drivers for Diversity and Innovation

During the COVID-19 crisis, Sánchez-Bayón et al. (2022) highlight the failures and challenges faced by the Spanish healthcare system during the COVID-19 crisis. They underscore the effectiveness of involving communities in healthcare decision-making, emphasizing community empowerment, advocacy, effective engagement, and the importance of robust technological infrastructure in mitigating these challenges. This research emphasizes the importance of empowering communities to advocate for their own needs, demonstrating the superiority of this approach over relying exclusively on public interventions.
Empowerment in post-crisis contexts intersects with the digital landscape’s emphasis on cultivating diversity among participants hailing from various locales. Through knowledge-driven mechanisms, empowerment facilitates innovation by facilitating the generation, dissemination, and application of knowledge, thereby empowering individuals and bolstering community resilience (Bratianu and Bejinaru 2020; Vainauskienė and Vaitkienė 2021; Wenzel et al. 2020). By nurturing collaborative environments, societies can foster informed decision-making, resilience, and holistic well-being, fostering a culture of empowerment and achievement (Bolisani and Bratianu 2017).

3. Methods

This study employed a mixed-methods approach to comprehensively explore empowerment experiences among patients and entrepreneurs. The methodology integrates scoping and integrative literature reviews with exploratory qualitative research, aiming to deepen insights and rigorously develop a theoretical framework grounded in Dubin’s methodology and Transdisciplinary Research (TDR) principles. Computational analysis findings were also integrated to enhance the theoretical understanding and practical implications of empowerment dynamics across diverse contexts. This holistic approach is designed to capture nuanced insights across domains and provide a deeper understanding of empowerment dynamics.

3.1. Literature Review

Diverse literature from psychology, sociology, and entrepreneurship studies was synthesized to explore challenges comprehensively and capture nuances across domains. Transdisciplinary Research (TDR) principles were integrated to transcend disciplinary boundaries effectively and address complex social challenges, as depicted in Figure 1.

3.1.1. Scoping Literature Review

The scoping literature review synthesized existing research on empowerment in personal health management (PHM) and entrepreneurship. Systematic searches across academic databases gathered a comprehensive body of literature, focusing primarily on English-language publications from 2010 onwards. The search strategy involved querying three prominent databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus) to comprehensively gather relevant literature. Foundational works prior to 2010 were also included to ensure a thorough understanding of the theoretical framework. Thematic synthesis of research papers facilitated insights into interconnected empowerment experiences, allowing for the identification of key themes and the establishment of a theoretical foundation.
During the screening and exclusion phases, specific criteria were designed to ensure the relevance of the 83 selected studies. These criteria focused the literature review on research directly contributing to understanding empowerment in personal health management (PHM) and entrepreneurship contexts:
  • Methodology Designs: Excluded research articles primarily focused on methodological approaches, study designs, or methodological critiques.
  • Clinical Skills and Healthcare Interventions: Excluded studies that primarily focused on clinical skills training, medical procedures, or specific healthcare interventions unless they directly addressed empowerment in PHM or entrepreneurship.
  • Environmental Issues: Excluded studies primarily focused on environmental conservation, climate change, or ecological sustainability unless they explicitly discussed their impact on empowerment in healthcare or entrepreneurship contexts.
  • Technological Advancements: Excluded studies solely focused on technological innovations or advancements in healthcare or entrepreneurship unless they specifically addressed their role in empowering individuals or communities.
  • Socioeconomic Aspects: Excluded studies primarily focused on socioeconomic factors such as poverty, inequality, or economic development unless they were directly related to empowerment in PHM or entrepreneurship.
These criteria ensured the relevance and focus of the literature review, enabling the synthesis of research that specifically contributed to understanding empowerment in PHM and entrepreneurship contexts.

3.1.2. Transdisciplinary Research (TDR)

Transdisciplinary Research (TDR) principles were integrated, adhering to PRISMA guidelines to ensure methodological rigor (Lam et al. 2021; Arksey and O’Malley 2005). While acknowledging the role of innovation and technology, the primary focus remained on individual empowerment and sustainable practices spanning management and social domains. This approach ensured that the theoretical framework was not only robust but also reflective of real-world complexities and nuances. Initially, the theoretical framework was constructed through insights drawn from psychology, sociology, health management, and entrepreneurship, guided by Dubin’s methodology (Dubin 1976). This phase established the Integrated Model for Individual Empowerment.

3.1.3. Methodological Rigor

Methodological rigor was maintained through adherence to structured frameworks and compliance with PRISMA guidelines (Levac et al. 2010; Peters et al. 2015; Arksey and O’Malley 2005). Thematic synthesis of research papers using qualitative data analysis software facilitated a deeper understanding of the research topics across diverse literature sources.

3.2. Qualitative Study

The study focused on chronic patients or caregivers from Bolivia or Spain, ensuring diverse representation in age, gender, socioeconomic status, and health conditions. A non-invasive qualitative approach was employed to validate the theoretical framework, utilizing existing community data to understand experiences within virtual patient communities. Structured online surveys and non-invasive data collection were used. Systematic data coding identified patterns and themes related to empowerment and community engagement, with efforts to achieve data saturation. The study adapted Zhang et al.’s (2017) framework and integrated Walsh and Al Achkar’s (2021) participation patterns, completing ‘lurking’ with a new code, ‘emotional engagement,’ to enhance the understanding of online patient community dynamics. Thematic and content analyses were combined to identify prevalent themes, ensuring the anonymity and privacy of participants.

3.2.1. Study Setting and Participants

The study was conducted within an existing virtual community comprising individuals managing chronic health conditions or serving as caregivers. The participant group exhibited diversity across various dimensions, including language, health status regarding chronic diseases, geographical location (with the majority residing in Bolivia or Spain), age, and likely socioeconomic background. Such diverse representation enriched the study by capturing a wide spectrum of perspectives and experiences related to managing chronic conditions within virtual communities.

3.2.2. Data Analysis

Thematic and content analysis, along with text mining facilitated by Atlas.ti 2.3 software, explored relationships, recurring patterns, and key themes within virtual communities (Hsieh and Shannon 2005; Braun and Clarke 2006). The analysis focused on two subsets: one group had access to both a virtual community and a blog (VCBA), while the other group only had access to the blog (BA). This approach allowed for a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of different online platforms for learning about disease management among chronic patients.

4. Results

4.1. Empowerment Experiences and Shared Challenges

The analysis in Table 2 revealed that empowered patients and entrepreneurs encounter similar hurdles despite operating in different spheres. This underscored how empowerment evolves in today’s society, providing individuals with essential resources and skills to take control of their lives (Rissel 1994; Maynard et al. 2012).
The study solidified the notion that empowerment experiences among patients EPH and entrepreneurs EE are intricately linked. Despite their distinct paths, both groups encounter comparable challenges, from navigating complex systems to managing uncertainty. Supportive environments play a crucial role in facilitating empowerment and addressing these challenges. The analysis reaffirmed the parallels between entrepreneurs and empowered patients, highlighting their shared journey toward personal growth and autonomy.

4.2. Contributions of Empowerment to Economic Progress

The findings underscored the vital role of empowerment in driving economic advancement in health decision-making and entrepreneurship (McAllister et al. 2012; Walter and Heinrichs 2015; Barker et al. 2018), as summarized in Table 3.
Establishing empowering foundations enables individuals to participate more effectively in activities, ultimately leading to significant economic implications such as increased productivity and prosperity (Shane and Venkataraman 2000). Entrepreneurs, through innovation and job creation, fuel economic expansion.
These insights underscored the interconnectedness between individual empowerment and economic progress, shaping contemporary societies (Schumpeter and Swedberg 2021).
Table 4 presents the comparative analysis between two perspectives: Intellectual Capital and Economic Development (ICED), in contrast to Empowerment and Personal Growth (EPG). The aim was to deepen the understanding of critical dynamics shaping social progress. While ICED emphasized the contribution of intellectual capital to economic growth at the social level, EPG focused more on individual development, encompassing psychological and social aspects. Comparing these perspectives provided insights into how investments in human capital and empowerment initiatives contributed to overall social advancement and well-being.
In this comparison, ICED highlighted knowledge management and the leveraging of human capital and intellectual assets to drive innovation and economic growth. As well as the promotion of community well-being through sustainable development and inclusive engagement. Conversely, EPG emphasized personal empowerment, focusing on competencies, skills, and self-efficacy to pursue long-term goals. It underscored how social capital and relationships facilitate the effective navigation of entrepreneurship and growth strategies.
Both domains acknowledged the transformative role of digital technology. ICED focused on its impact on knowledge management and innovation, while EPG highlighted its role in fostering community well-being. Overall, this comparison illustrated how ICED and EPG, while distinct, complemented each other, contributing to individual and social advancement through interconnected pathways. It reinforced the idea that empowered individuals and communities are essential for fostering innovation, economic growth, and sustainable development.

4.3. Qualitative Data Analysis

The results showed that despite diverse backgrounds, virtual community participants share common interests in empowerment, notably through information sharing and mutual support. The content analysis, represented in Table 5, Figure 2 and Figure 3, provides further insights into the themes and dynamics within the online communities.
Additionally, the thematic analysis, presented in Table 6, highlights the prevalence of certain empowerment factors, such as strong social support and effective information. Table 5 summarizes the results of the content analysis in this study. It utilized the features of Atlas.ti 2.3 for insight extraction. The analysis consisted of two subsets. Additionally, a word cloud in Figure 2 visually depicts commonly used words by participants of the blog support group.
As shown in Figure 3, the most commonly used word in virtual community support is group, followed by other words related to social support dynamics, in contrast to Figure 2, where the information search showed its relevance for the group. The word cloud represents chronic patients’ experiences and highlights the significance of each word. Larger, highlighted terms indicated frequently expressed opinions, while smaller, highlighted words represented less common expressions among shared opinions. These findings showcased a strong sense of solidarity and support, irrespective of participants’ diverse nationalities and health conditions, within virtual patient communities.
Table 5 highlights the BA support group primarily focused on health, well-being, and information exchange for healthy lifestyles, emphasizing knowledge sharing and mutual support for health-related matters. “Information” (16.00%) and “Health” (14.00%) were prominent themes, signifying their focus on health management and knowledge acquisition. In contrast, the VCBA support group centered its perspective on group dynamics, offering support, faith, positivity, and discussions related to health and emotional well-being within the group context. “Group” (17.27) and “support” (4.32%) highlighted their emphasis on group dynamics and mutual support.
The analysis revealed significant patterns of resilience and adaptation within virtual patient communities, highlighting the importance of social support and collective engagement in navigating adversity. Overall, the qualitative analysis provided valuable insights into the dynamics of virtual spaces and the interactions shaping them, contributing to a deeper understanding of individuals’ lived experiences within online communities of patients.
Table 6 presents the thematic analysis results, revealing identified patterns in online support groups. It categorized empowerment-related topics into Empowerment Foundations and Empowerment Factors, along with their corresponding percentages. This breakdown provided valuable insights into the key aspects shaping empowerment dynamics within the examined context.
The analysis highlighted themes with percentages over 5% within each foundation or factor. In the Empowerment Foundations category, Strong social support emerged as the predominant theme, garnering the highest percentage at 7%. This underscored the crucial role of social support in fostering empowerment. Within the Empowerment Factors category, Physical and intellectual impact stood out with the highest percentage of 8%, emphasizing its significance in influencing empowerment outcomes. Additionally, Effective information demonstrated the highest overall percentage at 10%, underscoring its pivotal role across both foundations and factors. These findings shed light on the key aspects that shaped empowerment dynamics within the examined context, providing valuable insights for further exploration and analysis.
The comment Acceptance and adaptability (6%) reflected the importance of perseverance and unity in facing life’s challenges. It emphasized the need to keep moving forward despite difficulties. Decision-making (3%) highlighted changes in lifestyle habits and decision-making processes influenced by the community, suggesting that individuals made conscious choices to prioritize self-care and manage emotional triggers. Effective Information (10%) denoted that, participants appreciated the valuable information provided by the group, particularly regarding maintaining a balanced and natural diet, suggesting that the community contributed positively to participants’ knowledge and behavior regarding health-related information. Emotional Engagement (4%) indicated that the group provided emotional support and encouragement, enhancing emotional engagement and resilience among participants. These findings shed light on the key aspects that shape empowerment dynamics within the examined context, providing valuable insights for further exploration and analysis.

4.4. Qualitative Analysis: Insights from Virtual Patient Communities

The thematic analysis of the virtual community data revealed several noteworthy findings. Firstly, participants exhibited innovative attitudes, particularly demonstrated through crowdfunding actions to support fellow members facing various challenges. Secondly, there were indications of novel lifestyle changes among members, suggesting a willingness to embrace new ways of living and coping with their circumstances. Thirdly, the data showed significant changes in professional adaptation, notably in the context of teleworking, particularly among cancer survivors within the community. Lastly, there were numerous community initiatives aimed at fostering collaboration to address challenges faced by participants, showcasing a strong sense of solidarity and support irrespective of participants’ diverse nationalities and different health conditions.
Table 6 reveals the empowerment foundations and factors as follows:
  • BA Support Group
    • Description: The BA support group emphasized health, well-being, and information exchange, promoting knowledge sharing and mutual support for health-related matters.
    • Empowerment Manifestation: Participants exhibited increased autonomy and self-efficacy in managing health conditions, as highlighted by the prominence of themes like “Information” and “Health” in Table 6 and the word cloud in Figure 2.
  • VCBA Support Group
    • Description: The VCBA support group focused on group dynamics, providing support, faith, and discussions related to health and emotional well-being.
    • Empowerment Manifestation: Strong social support and emotional engagement contributed to resilience and psychological well-being, as evidenced by themes such as “Strong social support” and “Emotional engagement” in Table 5 and the word cloud in Figure 2.
  • Empowerment Through Effective Information:
    • Description: Effective information played a pivotal role in shaping empowerment dynamics within online support groups.
    • Empowerment Manifestation: Access to relevant information enhances health literacy and decision-making capabilities, enabling informed choices and healthy lifestyle habits. The thematic analysis underscored the importance of “Effective information” in empowering individuals within virtual communities.
The results show that despite diverse backgrounds, virtual community participants share common interests in empowerment, notably through information sharing and mutual support. Thematic analysis revealed strong social support as a predominant theme in both the BA and VCBA support groups, highlighting its crucial role in empowerment (Table 6). Additionally, effective information exchange was prevalent, enhancing participants’ health literacy and decision-making (Table 5).
Furthermore, virtual communities serve as spaces for knowledge sharing and innovative solutions. The BA support group emphasized health and well-being, fostering autonomy and self-efficacy among participants through information exchange (Table 5). Similarly, the VCBA group focused on group dynamics, fostering resilience and psychological well-being through strong social support and emotional engagement (Table 6).

5. Theoretical Framework

The study emphasizes the integrated essence of empowerment, showcasing how various factors intersect to empower individuals across different domains, such as entrepreneurial ventures and health challenges (Acuña Mora et al. 2022; Small et al. 2013; Korber and McNaughton 2018; Rissel 1994).

5.1. Empowerment Foundations and Factors

Foundations establish the groundwork for empowerment, while factors contribute to its realization (Becker 1964), as illustrated in Table 7. Empowerment characteristics, as observable traits, reflect the outcomes of empowerment and are influenced by the interaction between factors and foundations. For instance, self-efficacy is a foundational element that influences individual empowerment (Bandura 1997), while social support acts as a crucial empowerment factor (Adler and Kwon 2002).
The empirical research highlights the significance of personal growth, resilience, and community support in fostering individual empowerment, according to the existing evidence (Small et al. 2013; Aujoulat et al. 2007). Furthermore, it underscores the role of empowerment factors and foundations, which include access to resources, social support, and opportunities for advancement, in shaping the context of empowerment (Korber and McNaughton 2018). The components and stages have the potential to contribute to diversity and innovation within empowered communities, particularly in the context of post-crisis COVID-19 recovery (Blaique et al. 2023).
Drawing from multiple disciplines, this theoretical perspective offers a nuanced understanding of empowerment at both individual and collective levels, confirming its interconnected and multifaceted nature (Wood et al. 2021), as depicted in Figure 4.

5.2. Core Components and Stages

The core components also represent stages in a developmental process. Each component represents a key phase that contributes to the overall progression towards community empowerment and sustainability. Therefore, they can be considered both core components and stages within the process, as outlined in Table 8.
  • Individual Empowerment (IE): This stage focuses on empowering individuals, enhancing their capabilities, and fostering a sense of autonomy and control over their lives.
  • Individual Engagement (IEG): After individuals are empowered, they become actively engaged in various activities within their communities. This stage involves participation, contribution, and involvement in community initiatives and projects.
  • Community Development (CD): As individuals engage and collaborate with one another, the community as a whole undergoes development. This stage involves collective efforts aimed at improving the well-being, infrastructure, and overall quality of life within the community.
  • Sustainable Practices (SP): Finally, sustainable practices are implemented to ensure that the development achieved is sustainable in the long term. This stage involves adopting practices that promote environmental sustainability, social equity, and economic stability within the community.
The stages of Individual Empowerment, Individual Engagement, Community Development, and Sustainable Practices contribute to various Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by promoting economic well-being, gender equality, sustainable infrastructure, responsible consumption, and environmental conservation (McAllister et al. 2012; Walter and Heinrichs 2015; Barker et al. 2018). Empowerment stages closely intertwine with knowledge dynamics, as knowledge is essential for empowering individuals and communities (Bratianu and Bejinaru 2020; Vainauskienė and Vaitkienė 2021).

5.2.1. Individual Empowerment

The analysis reveals that individual empowerment, characterized by autonomy and self-determination, among other factors, is pivotal for fostering individuals’ sense of control and well-being. Self-efficacy, alongside psychological traits like freedom, agency, ‘grit’, and resilience, significantly contributes to individual well-being and development (Sen 2017; Luthar 2015). Additionally, empowering individuals with skills, resources, and opportunities stimulates entrepreneurship, driving economic development. Empowered individuals play a critical role in economic growth and job creation, thereby enhancing both individual well-being and social development.
  • IE-IEG: Individual empowerment encourages individual engagement by instilling individuals with the confidence and resilience necessary to actively participate and engage meaningfully in their communities or organizations.
  • IE-CD: Individual empowerment contributes to community development by empowering individuals to actively participate in collaborative efforts and collective action aimed at enhancing community well-being and development.
  • IE-SP: Individual empowerment promotes sustainable practices by empowering individuals to advocate for and adopt sustainable behaviors, contributing to environmental, social, and economic sustainability.

5.2.2. Individual Engagement

Individual engagement encompasses active participation and deep involvement, reflecting individuals’ readiness to participate in meaningful activities (Hibbard and Greene 2013). Social support acts as a foundational element, fostering both active participation and engagement by providing support, resources, and encouragement (Bandura 2001; Chandna and Salimath 2020).
Engaging in personal development and entrepreneurial activities empowers individuals by providing autonomy and control over their well-being and financial destinies (Blaique et al. 2023). This empowerment fosters participation in knowledge-sharing activities and lifelong learning, enhancing individuals’ intellectual capital base (Wadichar et al. 2024; Mason and Brown 2014). Cultivating a culture of empowerment through platforms like community workshops and mentoring programs further facilitates continuous learning and knowledge exchange (Hsu and Lamb 2020).
  • IEG-IE: Individual engagement fosters individual empowerment by providing opportunities for individuals to assert control over their lives and make informed decisions, thereby enhancing their sense of autonomy and self-determination.
  • IEG-CD: Individual engagement contributes to community development by mobilizing individuals to collaborate and cooperate, thereby driving collective progress and addressing common challenges within communities.
  • IEG-SP: Individual engagement encourages sustainable practices by promoting active involvement in initiatives that promote environmental, social, and economic sustainability.

5.2.3. Community Development

Emphasizing subjective experiences and intentional behaviors in entrepreneurship sheds light on individual perceptions and actions in shaping entrepreneurial endeavors. Strong social connections and community support drive collective progress and facilitate the exchange of resources among members (Hatch and Dyer 2004; Schumpeter and Swedberg 2021). Additionally, online social capital influences trust and risk perception, further enhancing community dynamics (Liguori and Winkler 2020). Collaboration among community members empowers individuals, shapes community dynamics, and fosters entrepreneurship, ultimately promoting social cohesion, well-being, and sustainable growth (Champenois et al. 2020; Dyer and Nobeoka 2000; Gallant 2003; Ramoglou et al. 2020; Holt-Lunstad et al. 2010; Bacq et al. 2022). Moreover, such networks facilitate knowledge exchange, collaboration, and collective problem-solving, leveraging the collective intellectual capital of diverse stakeholders and driving progress toward the objectives outlined in the 2030 Agenda (Bratianu and Bejinaru 2020; Vainauskienė and Vaitkienė 2021).
  • CD-IE: Community development involves individual empowerment by providing opportunities for individuals to assert their autonomy and contribute to the collective progress and resilience of their communities.
  • CD-IEG: community development promotes individual engagement by creating environments conducive to active participation and fostering a sense of belonging and commitment among community members.
  • CD-SP: community development facilitates sustainable practices by establishing frameworks for collaborative action and collective problem-solving, which in turn promotes the adoption of environmentally friendly technologies and methods within communities.

5.2.4. Sustainable Practices

Empowered individuals play a crucial role in advocating for sustainable practices, which are essential for nurturing long-term community development and enhancing well-being. Communities that embrace sustainability safeguard resources protect the environment, and uphold social equity, benefiting both individuals and the community as a whole. Aligned with the principles of intellectual, these practices drive initiatives fostering community development and social progress (Muñoz and Cohen 2018; Storper 2005).
Furthermore, collaboration-driven initiatives, guided by a shared vision of holistic well-being, are pivotal in promoting economic prosperity and social advancement (Choo and Bontis 2002; Viedma Martí and do Rosário Cabrita 2012; Salimi 2022). Empowerment initiatives aimed at both patients and entrepreneurs can contribute to inclusive development by ensuring marginalized groups have access to knowledge, resources, and opportunities. Inclusive development approaches, guided by empowerment principles, help bridge gaps in access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, promoting sustainable development for all.
Individual empowerment is crucial for sustainable development and growth, whether in health or entrepreneurship. Empowered patients boost healthcare efficiency and drive economic growth with better health outcomes. Similarly, entrepreneurs fuel innovation, job creation, and economic competitiveness, fostering development. The link between empowerment and economic progress highlights its transformative role in shaping societies.
  • SP-IE: Sustainable practices enhance individual empowerment by providing opportunities for personal growth and success through the adoption of sustainable behaviors and initiatives.
  • SP-IEG: Sustainable practices enhance individual engagement by providing meaningful opportunities for individuals to engage in activities that contribute to the well-being and sustainability of their communities.
  • SP-CD: Sustainable practices support community development by promoting initiatives that enhance community resilience, social cohesion, and well-being, ultimately fostering long-term community development.

6. Discussion and Implications

This study elucidates the interconnectedness of empowerment experiences among patients and entrepreneurs, underlining the importance of collaborative environments and support networks in fostering innovation and growth, particularly in COVID-19 post-crisis (Mays et al. 2023; Blaique et al. 2023; Liguori and Winkler 2020; Smithson et al. 2021). The implications of these findings are explored, particularly regarding shared challenges in health management and entrepreneurship.

6.1. Understanding Empowerment Dynamics and Implications

The theoretical framework synthesizes insights from various disciplines to elucidate the underlying mechanisms shaping the challenges individuals encounter in health management and entrepreneurship (Anderson and Funnell 2010; Rashid 2019; Bravo et al. 2015). The results underscore the interconnected nature of empowerment experiences, emphasizing the pivotal role of collaborative environments and support networks (Zaheer et al. 2019; Wadichar et al. 2024; Frost and Massagli 2008). Additionally, the framework delineates key components like individual empowerment and community development, offering insights into their application across diverse contexts (Nicolopoulou et al. 2017; Bravo et al. 2015; Castro et al. 2016).
This study emphasizes integrated empowerment spanning both entrepreneurship and health management, placing strong emphasis on personal growth and the crucial role of community support. Essential stages of empowerment—Individual Empowerment, Engagement, Community Development, and Sustainable Practices—are identified, aligning with Sustainable Development Goals and integrating insights from management sciences. These stages serve as vital components facilitating both individual and collective empowerment, offering a roadmap for fostering sustainable collaborative environments for transformative progress and inclusive development (Smithson et al. 2021; Snow et al. 2017).
Moreover, the interconnected nature of empowerment experiences is underscored, highlighting the pivotal role of collaborative environments and support networks (Salimi 2022; Julius Onakoya and Babatunde 2013; Ramoglou et al. 2020). Additionally, the framework delineates key components such as individual empowerment and community development, providing valuable insights into their adaptability across diverse contexts. By exploring the relations between empowerment stages and knowledge dynamics, the study underscores the importance of fostering sustainable well-being and economic progress (Okojie et al. 2023).
In summary, the theoretical framework offers a foundational understanding of empowerment dynamics and their broad-ranging implications, laying the groundwork for transformative progress and inclusive development across various domains.

6.2. Synthesis of Findings

Diverse methodologies, including thematic and content analysis, reveal prevalent themes such as self-efficacy and support within virtual communities, offering insights into empowerment dynamics. Comparative analysis highlights shared experiences between patients and entrepreneurs, emphasizing the role of empowerment in driving economic advancement and social evolution.
The analysis of virtual patient communities illustrates how access to information and supportive networks empowers individuals to make informed choices. Overall, varied approaches explore the impact of individual empowerment on engagement, community development, and sustainable practices.
By comparing the perspectives of entrepreneurship and patients, nuanced insights into empowerment factors across contexts are provided (McAllister et al. 2012). Identified shared challenges underscore the evolving nature of empowerment, emphasizing its significance for personal development and well-being (Hartzler and Pratt 2011). Exploring dynamics between both domains achieves a deeper understanding of empowerment processes, highlighting its role in fostering resilience and implications for economic progress and social innovation.
The qualitative analysis underscores support and collective engagement in virtual patient communities, indicating how online platforms empower individuals through enhanced interaction and resource sharing. Cultivating environments of mutual support and learning empowers individuals to overcome barriers and foster inclusive progress (Ramoglou et al. 2020; Julius Onakoya and Babatunde 2013).
The thematic analysis further elucidates empowerment-related themes such as self-efficacy, personal control, and social support, showcasing varying emphases and perspectives within subgroups. This comprehensive approach yields valuable insights into dynamics, accentuating the transformative potential of collaboration and knowledge exchange. Additionally, platforms foster inclusiveness by transcending geographical divides, facilitating equitable access to information and support regardless of location or socioeconomic status. Collaborative endeavors and shared insights enable community members to collectively address obstacles and drive positive change within their communities.
Overall, these findings suggest that virtual communities serve as valuable platforms for individuals from diverse backgrounds to come together, share experiences, and collectively overcome challenges related to chronic health conditions. The study underscores the potential of virtual communities to foster empowerment, diversity, and innovation, ultimately contributing to the well-being of their members.

6.3. Utilization of Virtual Communities for Diversity and Innovation

Leveraging virtual communities offers a dynamic environment for fostering empowerment through the exploration of diversity and innovation, thereby contributing to inclusive and impactful outcomes with the following implications:
  • Diverse Participants: Virtual communities attract a diverse range of individuals managing chronic health conditions and involved in entrepreneurship, enhancing research diversity.
  • Innovation Hubs: Virtual communities foster creativity and innovation, enabling researchers to identify novel solutions through interactions and collaborations.
  • Intersectionality Exploration: Researchers can analyze how factors like gender, race, and socioeconomic status intersect within virtual communities, informing inclusive approaches.
  • Inclusive Empowerment Strategies: Engaging with community members allows researchers to co-create culturally sensitive interventions, ensuring they meet diverse needs.
  • Cross-disciplinary Collaboration: Virtual platforms bring together individuals with diverse expertise, fostering collaborative problem-solving and innovative ideas.
  • Cultural Competence: Researchers adopt culturally sensitive communication strategies, building trust and rapport with community members from diverse backgrounds.
  • Promotion of Inclusive Entrepreneurship: Virtual communities support underrepresented groups in entrepreneurship, enabling researchers to develop initiatives that address barriers and promote diversity.

6.4. Theoretical Implications

The theoretical framework integrates insights from personal health management and entrepreneurship literature, extending existing models of empowerment. Emphasizing foundations like self-efficacy, social support, and collaboration, this framework offers a comprehensive understanding of empowerment processes, highlighting the importance of personal growth, resilience, and community support in empowering individuals to address health challenges and pursue entrepreneurial ventures. Identifying common factors across different domains underscores the transferability of empowerment dynamics and the need for context-specific interventions.
Insights from various disciplines are integrated to uncover the mechanisms behind challenges in health management and entrepreneurship, contributing to understanding empowerment dynamics across domains. Future research could refine the framework by integrating additional theories and perspectives from diverse cultural contexts, emphasizing the importance of interdisciplinary approaches in addressing complex issues related to empowerment in healthcare and entrepreneurship
Furthermore, the theoretical framework underscores the integrative nature of empowerment. Findings illustrate a scoping approach to understanding various aspects of empowerment, enriching comprehension of it as a multifaceted concept grounded in both theoretical principles and practical applications. This integration facilitates a deeper understanding of empowerment processes, informing the development of effective interventions tailored to varied contexts (Bratianu and Bejinaru 2020; Vainauskienė and Vaitkienė 2021).

6.5. Practical Implications

The findings have implications for stakeholders involved in promoting empowerment in personal health management and entrepreneurship. Healthcare professionals can leverage virtual communities and online platforms to enhance patient engagement and provide holistic support. Similarly, policymakers and business leaders can create collaborative environments and educational initiatives to empower entrepreneurs and foster innovation. Strategies and interventions derived from the research can foster collaborative environments, enhance social support networks, and provide access to resources and education, thereby empowering individuals to overcome challenges (Frost and Massagli 2008; McAllister et al. 2012; Shepherd and Patzelt 2011; Ramoglou et al. 2020).

6.6. Implications for Intellectual Capital and Sustainable Development

The exploration of shared challenges holds significant implications for intellectual capital and development, highlighting empowerment’s critical role in facilitating individual agency, innovation, and collaboration. By investing in empowerment initiatives and fostering conducive environments for knowledge creation and sharing, societies can harness intellectual capital to address pressing sustainability challenges outlined in the 2030 Agenda (Viedma Martí and do Rosário Cabrita 2012, 2023).

6.7. Fostering Innovation, Collaborative Networks, and Inclusive Development

Empowered entrepreneurs are inclined to innovate and drive sustainable development initiatives enabled by autonomy and available resources. Creative knowledge nurtured within supportive ecosystems leads to the development of novel technologies, business models, and solutions addressing sustainability challenges (Belitski and Heron 2017; Fattah et al. 2021; Bacq et al. 2022). This research highlights the significance of collaborative environments and support networks, emphasizing the role of community dynamics. By fostering collaborative spaces, societies can leverage the collective intellectual capital of diverse stakeholders to address complex sustainability issues and advance progress toward the goals of the 2030 Agenda. Furthermore, empowerment initiatives targeting both patients and entrepreneurs can foster inclusive development. By ensuring access to knowledge, resources, and opportunities for marginalized groups, societies can leverage intellectual capital for sustainable development, promoting inclusivity in education, healthcare, and economic opportunities (Hartzler and Pratt 2011; Julius Onakoya and Babatunde 2013; Nambisan and Baron 2013).

6.8. Addressing Potential Drawbacks of Empowerment Initiatives

While empowerment is often praised for its positive impacts, it’s crucial to acknowledge potential drawbacks and ensure that initiatives are effectively implemented to address them. One significant concern is the risk of widening existing disparities, which could perpetuate inequalities. Furthermore, there is a danger of overemphasizing individual empowerment at the expense of collective well-being. To mitigate these risks, empowerment initiatives should be accompanied by measures promoting equity, inclusivity, and sustainability, ensuring that their benefits are realized by all members of society.

7. Conclusions

The exploration of shared challenges among empowered patients and entrepreneurs within the context of post-crisis periods sheds light on crucial dynamics influencing diversity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. This study underscores the fundamental role of empowered patients and entrepreneurs in driving personal health management efficiency, economic growth, and social change. By exploring the intersection of empowerment and entrepreneurship, deeper insights have been gained into how these dynamics address shared challenges within health management contexts and entrepreneurial ventures. The interconnectedness of empowerment and entrepreneurship is highlighted, emphasizing the need for collaborative efforts among stakeholders to facilitate social advancement and sustainable progress.
In summary, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of empowerment dynamics and their implications for social progress. Embracing collaborative approaches and informed practices can harness the full potential of empowerment to shape more resilient, innovative, and inclusive societies for the future. The findings highlight specific empowerment foundations such as self-efficacy, social support, collaboration, and cooperation, which provide individuals with frameworks to assert control over their lives and pursue their goals. Additionally, the empowerment factors of autonomy, active participation, and access to resources contribute to tangible expressions of empowerment in individuals’ behaviors and attitudes. The qualitative analysis reveals patterns of resilience and adaptation within virtual patient communities, emphasizing the importance of social support and collective engagement in navigating adversity, providing further insight into the dynamic nature of empowerment in contemporary society.

7.1. Limitations

The study acknowledges several limitations that impact the generalizability of its findings. Firstly, the research sample primarily consists of individuals engaged in online communities, which may not fully represent the broader population. Secondly, reliance on self-reported data from virtual communities introduces potential biases in the findings, necessitating careful consideration of the scope and applicability of the results.
Furthermore, the study’s cross-sectional design limits its ability to establish causal relationships between variables. Longitudinal studies are recommended to provide more robust evidence of the long-term impacts of empowerment interventions, allowing for a deeper understanding of the causal pathways involved.
Additionally, the theoretical framework developed in the study may not encompass all dimensions of empowerment in healthcare and entrepreneurship. Future research could refine the framework by integrating additional theories and perspectives, thereby enhancing its explanatory power and relevance across diverse contexts.
In conclusion, while the study offers valuable insights into the shared challenges faced by empowered individuals, further research is essential to overcome these limitations. By addressing these constraints, future studies can contribute to the development of more comprehensive and effective empowerment interventions tailored to the needs of diverse communities.

7.2. Future Research Directions

Recognizing the implications of empowerment for intellectual capital and sustainable development underscores the importance of fostering individual agency, innovation, and collaboration. Future research endeavors should delve deeper into these dimensions, exploring additional facets of empowerment in healthcare and entrepreneurship.
Longitudinal studies are warranted to investigate the long-term impacts of empowerment interventions on individual well-being. Additionally, qualitative research can provide further insights into the role of social support networks in facilitating empowerment and addressing associated challenges.
Moreover, comparative studies across diverse cultural contexts can offer valuable insights into the cultural factors influencing empowerment experiences. By examining these nuances, tailored interventions can be developed to promote empowerment and social innovation within diverse communities, ensuring inclusivity and effectiveness.
Incorporating longitudinal, qualitative, and comparative approaches will provide a more comprehensive understanding of empowerment dynamics over time and across cultures. These insights will not only deepen our theoretical understanding but also inform the development of effective strategies that promote holistic well-being and economic advancement among empowered individuals and communities.
However, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations of this study, including its focus on a specific context and sample size. Therefore, future research should aim to expand its scope to encompass diverse regions and populations. By conducting expanded research, we can broaden our understanding of empowerment dynamics and facilitate innovative changes in both theory and practice in the realms of empowerment and entrepreneurship.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author due to privacy and ethical reasons.

Conflicts of Interest

No conflicts of interest are declared by the author.

References

  1. Acs, Zoltan J., and Fiona Sussan. 2017. The Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystem. Small Business Economics 49: 55–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Acuña Mora, Mariela, Carina Sparud-Lundin, Philip Moons, and Ewa Lena Bratt. 2022. Definitions, Instruments and Correlates of Patient Empowerment: A Descriptive Review. Patient Education and Counseling 105: 346–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Adler, Paul S., and Seok-Woo Kwon. 2002. Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept. Academy of Management Review 27: 17–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Amabile, Teresa M. 2018. Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson, Robert M., and Martha M. Funnell. 2010. Patient Empowerment: Myths and Misconceptions. Patient Education and Counseling 79: 277–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Arksey, Hilary, and Lisa O’Malley. 2005. Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8: 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Audretsch, David B., and Erik Lehmann. 2006. Entrepreneurial Access and Absorption of Knowledge Spillovers: Strategic Board and Managerial Composition for Competitive Advantage. Journal of Small Business Management 44: 155–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Aujoulat, Isabelle, William d’Hoore, and Alain Deccache. 2007. Patient Empowerment in Theory and Practice: Polysemy or Cacophony? Patient Education and Counseling 66: 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Bacq, Sophie, Christina Hertel, and G. T. Lumpkin. 2022. Communities at the Nexus of Entrepreneurship and Societal Impact: A Cross-Disciplinary Literature Review. Journal of Business Venturing 37: 106231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Balcazar, Fabricio E., JoAnn Kuchak, Shawn Dimpfl, Varun Sariepella, and Francisco Alvarado. 2014. An Empowerment Model of Entrepreneurship for People with Disabilities in the United States. Psychosocial Intervention 23: 145–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bandura, Albert. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bandura, Albert. 2001. Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 52: 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Barker, Isaac, Adam Steventon, Robert Williamson, and Sarah R. Deeny. 2018. Self-Management Capability in Patients with Long-Term Conditions Is Associated with Reduced Healthcare Utilisation across a Whole Health Economy: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Electronic Health Records. BMJ Quality & Safety 27: 989–99. [Google Scholar]
  14. Becker, Gary S. 1964. Human Capital A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education, 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Belitski, Maksim, and Keith Heron. 2017. Expanding Entrepreneurship Education Ecosystems. Journal of Management Development 36: 163–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Belitski, Maksim, Rosa Caiazza, and Erik E. Lehmann. 2021. Knowledge Frontiers and Boundaries in Entrepreneurship Research. Small Business Economics 56: 521–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Blaique, Lama, Hussein Nabil Ismail, and Hazem Aldabbas. 2023. Organizational Learning, Resilience and Psychological Empowerment as Antecedents of Work Engagement during COVID-19. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 72: 1584–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bocquet, Rachel, Christian Le Bas, Caroline Mothe, and Nicolas Poussing. 2019. Strategic CSR for Innovation in SMEs: Does Diversity Matter? Long Range Planning 52: 101913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bolisani, Ettore, and Constantin Bratianu. 2017. Knowledge Strategy Planning: An Integrated Approach to Manage Uncertainty, Turbulence, and Dynamics. Journal of Knowledge Management 21: 233–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bouzakhem, Najib, Panteha Farmanesh, Pouya Zargar, Muhieddine Ramadan, Hala Baydoun, Amira Daouk, and Ali Mouazen. 2023. Rebuilding the Workplace in the Post-Pandemic Age through Human Capital Development Programs: A Moderated Mediation Model. Administrative Sciences 13: 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bratianu, Constantin, and Ruxandra Bejinaru. 2020. Knowledge Dynamics: A Thermodynamics Approach. Kybernetes 49: 6–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bravo, Paulina, Adrian Edwards, Paul James Barr, Isabelle Scholl, Glyn Elwyn, and Marion McAllister. 2015. Conceptualising Patient Empowerment: A Mixed Methods Study. BMC Health Services Research 15: 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Cajaiba-Santana, Giovany. 2014. Social Innovation: Moving the Field Forward. A Conceptual Framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 82: 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Carayannis, Elias G., David F. J. Campbell, and Evangelos Grigoroudis. 2022. Helix Trilogy: The Triple, Quadruple, and Quintuple Innovation Helices from a Theory, Policy, and Practice Set of Perspectives. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 13: 2272–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Castells, Manuel. 2000. Toward a Sociology of the Network Society. Contemporary Sociology 29: 693–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Castro, Eva Marie, Tine Van Regenmortel, Kris Vanhaecht, Walter Sermeus, and Ann Van Hecke. 2016. Patient Empowerment, Patient Participation and Patient-Centeredness in Hospital Care: A Concept Analysis Based on a Literature Review. Patient Education and Counseling 99: 1923–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Champenois, Claire, Vincent Lefebvre, and Sébastien Ronteau. 2020. Entrepreneurship as Practice: Systematic Literature Review of a Nascent Field. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 32: 281–312. [Google Scholar]
  29. Chandna, Vallari, and Manjula S. Salimath. 2020. When Technology Shapes Community in the Cultural and Craft Industries: Understanding Virtual Entrepreneurship in Online Ecosystems. Technovation 92: 102042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Choo, Chun Wei, and Nick Bontis. 2002. The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  31. Cohen, Sheldon, and Thomas Ashby Wills. 1985. Stress, Social Support, and the Buffering Hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin 98: 310–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Coleman, James S. 2009. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. In Knowledge and Social Capital. London: Routledge, pp. 17–42. [Google Scholar]
  33. De Bem Machado, Andreia, Silvana Secinaro, Davide Calandra, and Federico Lanzalonga. 2022. Knowledge Management and Digital Transformation for Industry 4.0: A Structured Literature Review. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 20: 320–38. [Google Scholar]
  34. Diener, Ed. 2012. New Findings and Future Directions for Subjective Well-Being Research. American Psychologist 67: 590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dubin, Robert. 1976. Theory Building in Applied Areas. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 17: 39. [Google Scholar]
  36. Dubin, Robert. 1978. Theory Development. New York: Free Press. [Google Scholar]
  37. Duckworth, Angela L., Christopher Peterson, Michael D. Matthews, and Dennis R Kelly. 2007. Grit: Perseverance and Passion for Long-Term Goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92: 1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dweck, Carol S. 2006. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House. [Google Scholar]
  39. Dyer, Jeffrey H., and Kentaro Nobeoka. 2000. Creating and Managing a High-performance Knowledge-sharing Network: The Toyota Case. Strategic Management Journal 21: 345–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Edvinsson, Leif, and Patrick Sullivan. 1996. Developing a Model for Managing Intellectual Capital. European Management Journal 14: 356–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Eisenhardt, Kathleen M., and Jeffrey A. Martin. 2000. Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They? Strategic Management Journal 21: 1105–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Fattah, Anim, Imam Syairozi, and Lailatur Rohimah. 2021. Youth Creative Entrepreneur Empowerment (YOUTIVEE): Solutions for Youth to Contribute to the Economy and Reduce Unemployment. International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR) 5: 1689–97. [Google Scholar]
  43. Frost, Jeana, and Michael Massagli. 2008. Social Uses of Personal Health Information within PatientsLikeMe, an Online Patient Community: What Can Happen When Patients Have Access to One Another’s Data. Journal of Medical Internet Research 10: e1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Fumagalli, Lia Paola, Giovanni Radaelli, Emanuele Lettieri, and Cristina Masella. 2015. Patient Empowerment and Its Neighbours: Clarifying the Boundaries and Their Mutual Relationships. Health Policy 119: 384–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gallant, Mary P. 2003. The Influence of Social Support on Chronic Illness Self-Management: A Review and Directions for Research. Health Education & Behavior 30: 170–95. [Google Scholar]
  46. Gratton, Lynda, and Sumantra Ghoshal. 2003. Managing Personal Human Capital: New Ethos for the ‘Volunteer’Employee. European Management Journal 21: 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gurău, Călin, and Léo Paul Dana. 2018. Environmentally-Driven Community Entrepreneurship: Mapping the Link between Natural Environment, Local Community and Entrepreneurship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 129: 221–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hart, Stuart L., and Mark B. Milstein. 2003. Creating Sustainable Value. Academy of Management Perspectives 17: 56–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hartzler, Andrea, and Wanda Pratt. 2011. Managing the Personal Side of Health: How Patient Expertise Differs from the Expertise of Clinicians. Journal of Medical Internet Research 13: e62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hatch, Nile W., and Jeffrey H. Dyer. 2004. Human Capital and Learning as a Source of Sustainable Competitive Advantage. Strategic Management Journal 25: 1155–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hemingway, Christine A. 2005. Personal Values as a Catalyst for Corporate Social Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics 60: 233–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Henao-Zapata, Daniel, and José M. Peiró. 2018. The Importance of Empowerment in Entrepreneurship. In Inside the Mind of the Entrepreneur: Cognition, Personality Traits, Intention, and Gender Behavior. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 185–206. [Google Scholar]
  53. Hibbard, Judith, and Jessica Greene. 2013. What the Evidence Shows about Patient Activation: Better Health Outcomes and Care Experiences; Fewer Data on Costs. Health Affairs 32: 207–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Holt-Lunstad, Julianne, Timothy B. Smith, and J. Bradley Layton. 2010. Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-Analytic Review. Edited by Carol Brayne. PLoS Medicine 7: e1000316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Hood, Jacqueline N., and John E. Young. 1993. Entrepreneurship’s Requisite Areas of Development: A Survey of Top Executives in Successful Entrepreneurial Firms. Journal of Business Venturing 8: 115–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hsieh, Hsiu Fang, and Sarah E. Shannon. 2005. Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15: 1277–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Hsu, Shih-Wei, and Peter Lamb. 2020. Still in Search of Learning Organization? Towards a Radical Account of The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. The Learning Organization 27: 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hurtado Illanes, Marisol. 2019. Inclusiveness in Healthcare: Knowledge Ecosystems Innovation in Oncology and Chronic Disease. In European Conference on Knowledge Management. Reading: Academic Conferences International Limited, pp. 1182–92. [Google Scholar]
  59. Israel, Barbara A., Barry Checkoway, Amy Schulz, and Marc Zimmerman. 1994. Health Education and Community Empowerment: Conceptualizing and Measuring Perceptions of Individual, Organizational, and Community Control. Health Education Quarterly 21: 149–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Julius Onakoya, Adebiyi, and Adegbemi Babatunde. 2013. Entrepreneurship, Economic Development and Inclusive Growth. International Journal of Social Sciences and Entrepreneurship 1: 375–87. [Google Scholar]
  61. Kabeer, Naila. 1999. Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections on the Measurement of Women’s Empowerment. Development and Change 30: 435–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Korber, Stefan, and Rod B. McNaughton. 2018. Resilience and Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 24: 1129–54. [Google Scholar]
  63. Lam, David P. M., Maria E. Freund, Josefa Kny, Oskar Marg, Melanie Mbah, Lena Theiler, Matthias Bergmann, Bettina Brohmann, Daniel J. Lang, and Martina Schäfer. 2021. Transdisciplinary Research: Towards an Integrative Perspective. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 30: 243–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Levac, Danielle, Heather Colquhoun, and Kelly K O’brien. 2010. Scoping Studies: Advancing the Methodology. Implementation Science 5: 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Liguori, Eric, and Christoph Winkler. 2020. From Offline to Online: Challenges and Opportunities for Entrepreneurship Education Following the COVID-19 Pandemic. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy 3: 346–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lorig, Kate R., and Halsted R. Holman. 2003. Self-Management Education: History, Definition, Outcomes, and Mechanisms. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 26: 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Luthans, Fred, and Carolyn M. Youssef-Morgan. 2017. Psychological Capital: An Evidence-Based Positive Approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 4: 339–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Luthans, Fred, and Elina S. Ibrayeva. 2006. Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy in Central Asian Transition Economies: Quantitative and Qualitative Analyses. Journal of International Business Studies 37: 92–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Luthar, Suniya S. 2015. Resilience in Development: A Synthesis of Research across Five Decades. In Developmental Psychopathology: Volume Three: Risk, Disorder, and Adaptation. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 739–95. [Google Scholar]
  70. Mason, Colin, and Ross Brown. 2014. Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Growth Oriented Entrepreneurship. Final Report to OECD, Paris 30: 77–102. [Google Scholar]
  71. Maynard, M. Travis, Lucy L. Gilson, and John E. Mathieu. 2012. Empowerment—Fad or Fab? A Multilevel Review of the Past Two Decades of Research. Journal of Management 38: 1231–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Mays, Kate K., Sejin Paik, Briana Trifiro, and James E. Katz. 2023. Coping during COVID-19: How Attitudinal, Efficacy, and Personality Differences Drive Adherence to Protective Measures. Journal of Communication in Healthcare 17: 30–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. McAllister, Marion, Graham Dunn, Katherine Payne, Linda Davies, and Chris Todd. 2012. Patient Empowerment: The Need to Consider It as a Measurable Patient-Reported Outcome for Chronic Conditions. BMC Health Services Research 12: 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Meshram, Sachin A., and A. M. Rawani. 2019. Understanding Entrepreneurial Ecosystem. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD) 10: 103–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Mou, Yi, and Carolyn A. Lin. 2017. The Impact of Online Social Capital on Social Trust and Risk Perception. Asian Journal of Communication 27: 563–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Muñoz, Pablo, and Boyd Cohen. 2018. Sustainable Entrepreneurship Research: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead. Business Strategy and the Environment 27: 300–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Nahapiet, Janine, and Sumantra Ghoshal. 2009. Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. In Knowledge and Social Capital. Abingdon: Taylor and Francis Inc, pp. 119–58. [Google Scholar]
  78. Nambisan, Satish. 2017. Digital Entrepreneurship: Toward a Digital Technology Perspective of Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 41: 1029–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Nambisan, Satish, and Robert A. Baron. 2013. Entrepreneurship in Innovation Ecosystems: Entrepreneurs’ Self-Regulatory Processes and Their Implications for New Venture Success. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 37: 1071–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Nicolopoulou, Katerina, Mine Karataş-Özkan, Frank Janssen, and John M. Jermier. 2017. Sustainable Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation. London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group Earthscan from Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  81. Nowell, Branda, and Neil M. Boyd. 2014. Sense of Community Responsibility in Community Collaboratives: Advancing a Theory of Community as Resource and Responsibility. American Journal of Community Psychology 54: 229–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Okojie, Glory, Ida Rosnita Ismail, Halima Begum, A. S. A. Ferdous Alam, and Elkhan Richard Sadik-Zada. 2023. The Mediating Role of Social Support on the Relationship between Employee Resilience and Employee Engagement. Sustainability 15: 7950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Panagioti, Maria, Gerry Richardson, Nicola Small, Elizabeth Murray, Anne Rogers, Anne Kennedy, Stanton Newman, and Peter Bower. 2014. Self-Management Support Interventions to Reduce Health Care Utilisation without Compromising Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMC Health Services Research 14: 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Perkins, Douglas D., and Marc A. Zimmerman. 1995. Empowerment Theory, Research, and Application. American Journal of Community Psychology 23: 569–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Peters, Micah D. J., Christina M. Godfrey, Hanan Khalil, Patricia McInerney, Deborah Parker, and Cassia Baldini Soares. 2015. Guidance for Conducting Systematic Scoping Reviews. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare 13: 141–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Pigg, Kenneth E. 2002. Three Faces of Empowerment: Expanding the Theory of Empowerment in Community Development. Community Development 33: 107–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Putnam, Robert D. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster. [Google Scholar]
  88. Ramoglou, Stratos, William B. Gartner, and Eric W. K. Tsang. 2020. “Who Is an Entrepreneur?’ Is (Still) the Wrong Question. Journal of Business Venturing Insights 13: e00168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Rappaport, Julian. 1995. Empowerment Meets Narrative: Listening to Stories and Creating Settings. American Journal of Community Psychology 23: 795–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Rashid, Lubna. 2019. Entrepreneurship Education and Sustainable Development Goals: A Literature Review and a Closer Look at Fragile States and Technology-Enabled Approaches. Sustainability 11: 5343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Ridings, Catherine M., and David Gefen. 2004. Virtual Community Attraction: Why People Hang out Online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10: JCMC10110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Rissel, Christopher. 1994. Empowerment: The Holy Grail of Health Promotion? Health Promotion International 9: 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ryan, Richard M., and Edward L. Deci. 2000. Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist 55: 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Sachs, Jeffrey D. 2015. The Age of Sustainable Development. New York: Columbia University Press. [Google Scholar]
  95. Salimi, Negin. 2022. How Does the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Contribute to the Performance of Entrepreneurial Start-Up Firms? In Advances in Best-Worst Method: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Best-Worst Method (BWM2021). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 52–66. [Google Scholar]
  96. Sánchez-Bayón, Antonio, Esther González-Arnedo, and Ángel Andreu-Escario. 2022. Spanish Healthcare Sector Management in the COVID-19 Crisis under the Perspective of Austrian Economics and New-Institutional Economics. Frontiers in Public Health 10: 801525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Sánchez-Bayón, Antonio, F. Javier Sastre, and Luis Isasi Sánchez. 2024. Public Management of Digitalization into the Spanish Tourism Services: A Heterodox Analysis. Review of Managerial Science 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Schultz, Theodore W. 1961. Investment in Human Capital. The American Economic Review 51: 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  99. Schumpeter, Joseph A., and Richard Swedberg. 2021. The Theory of Economic Development. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  100. Sen, Amartya. 2017. Well-Being, Agency and Freedom the Dewey Lectures 1984. In Justice and the Capabilities Approach. London: Routledge, pp. 3–55. [Google Scholar]
  101. Shane, Scott, and Sankaran Venkataraman. 2000. The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research. Academy of Management Review 25: 217–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Shane, Scott Andrew. 2003. A General Theory of Entrepreneurship: The Individual-Opportunity Nexus. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  103. Shepherd, Dean A., and Holger Patzelt. 2011. The New Field of Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Studying Entrepreneurial Action Linking ‘What Is to Be Sustained’ with ‘What Is to Be Developed’. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 35: 137–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Sindakis, Stavros, and Fotis Kitsios. 2016. Entrepreneurial Dynamics and Patient Involvement in Service Innovation: Developing a Model to Promote Growth and Sustainability in Mental Health Care. Journal of the Knowledge Economy 7: 545–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Sitaridis, Ioannis, and Fotis Kitsios. 2024. Digital Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurship Education: A Review of the Literature. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 30: 277–304. [Google Scholar]
  106. Small, Nicola, Peter Bower, Carolyn A. Chew-Graham, Diane Whalley, and Joanne Protheroe. 2013. Patient Empowerment in Long-Term Conditions: Development and Preliminary Testing of a New Measure. BMC Health Services Research 13: 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Smithson, Rachael, Elisha Roche, and Christina Wicker. 2021. Virtual Models of Chronic Disease Management: Lessons from the Experiences of Virtual Care during the COVID-19 Response. Australian Health Review 45: 311–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Snow, Charles C., Dorthe Døjbak Håkonsson, and Børge Obel. 2017. A Smart City Is a Collaborative Community. California Management Review 59: 92–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Snowden, David, David Pauleen, and Sally Jansen van Vuuren. 2016. Managing Your Own Knowledge: A Personal Perspective. In Personal Knowledge Management: Individual, Organizational and Social Perspectives. Edited by G. E. Gorman. London: Routledge, pp. 121–36. [Google Scholar]
  110. Spigel, Ben. 2017. The Relational Organization of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 41: 49–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Stam, Erik. 2015. Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique. European Planning Studies 23: 1759–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Stewart, Thomas A. 2007. The Wealth of Knowledge: Intellectual Capital and the Twenty-First Century Organization. Melbourne: Crown Currency. [Google Scholar]
  113. Storper, Michael. 2005. Society, Community, and Economic Development. Studies in Comparative International Development 39: 30–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Tang, Tanya Ya, Gregory J. Fisher, and William J. Qualls. 2021. The Effects of Inbound Open Innovation, Outbound Open Innovation, and Team Role Diversity on Open Source Software Project Performance. Industrial Marketing Management 94: 216–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Teece, David J., Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen. 1997. Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal 18: 509–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Theodoraki, Christina, Karim Messeghem, and Mark P. Rice. 2018. A Social Capital Approach to the Development of Sustainable Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: An Explorative Study. Small Business Economics 51: 153–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Thoits, Peggy A. 2011. Mechanisms Linking Social Ties and Support to Physical and Mental Health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 52: 145–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Toivonen, Tuukka. 2016. What Is the Social Innovation Community? Conceptualizing an Emergent Collaborative Organization. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship 7: 49–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Unger, Jens M., Andreas Rauch, Michael Frese, and Nina Rosenbusch. 2011. Human Capital and Entrepreneurial Success: A Meta-Analytical Review. Journal of Business Venturing 26: 341–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Vainauskienė, Vestina, and Rimgailė Vaitkienė. 2021. Enablers of Patient Knowledge Empowerment for Self-Management of Chronic Disease: An Integrative Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18: 2247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Viedma Martí, José María, and Maria do Rosário Cabrita. 2012. Entrepreneurial Excellence in the Knowledge Economy: Intellectual Capital Benchmarking Systems. Palgrave Macmillan. Available online: https://books.google.es/books/about/Entrepreneurial_Excellence_in_the_Knowle.html?id=ckayDNucIE0C&redir_esc=y (accessed on 4 September 2023).
  122. Viedma Martí, José María, and Maria do Rosário Cabrita. 2023. Advancing the Intellectual Capital Theory: Some Ways Forward. In ECKM 2023 24th European Conference on Knowledge Management. Reading: Academic Conferences and Publishing Limited, vol. 2. [Google Scholar]
  123. Von Krogh, Georg, Ikujiro Nonaka, and Lise Rechsteiner. 2012. Leadership in Organizational Knowledge Creation: A Review and Framework. Journal of Management Studies 49: 240–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Wadichar, Rahul Krushnaji, Prashant Manusmare, and Mukul Abasaheb Burghate. 2024. Entrepreneurial Ecosystem: A Systematic Literature Review. Vision 28: 143–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Walsh, Casey A., and Morhaf. Al Achkar. 2021. A Qualitative Study of Online Support Communities for Lung Cancer Survivors on Targeted Therapies. Supportive Care in Cancer 29: 4493–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Walter, Sascha G., and Simon Heinrichs. 2015. Who Becomes an Entrepreneur? A 30-Years-Review of Individual-Level Research. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 22: 225–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Wenger, Etienne. 2010. Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems: The Career of a Concept. In Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice. London: Springer, pp. 179–98. [Google Scholar]
  128. Wenger, Etienne, Richard McDermott, and William M. Snyder. 2002. Seven Principles for Cultivating Communities of Practice. Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge 4: 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  129. Wenzel, Matthias, Sarah Stanske, and Marvin B. Lieberman. 2020. Strategic Responses to Crisis. Strategic Management Journal 41: 3161. [Google Scholar]
  130. Wigger, Karin Andrea, and Dean A. Shepherd. 2020. We’re All in the Same Boat: A Collective Model of Preserving and Accessing Nature-Based Opportunities. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 44: 587–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Wilson, Chris. K., Julian Thomas, and Jo Barraket. 2019. Measuring digital inequality in Australia: The Australian digital inclusion index. Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy 7: 102–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Wood, Bronwyn P., Poh Yen Ng, and Bettina Lynda Bastian. 2021. Hegemonic Conceptualizations of Empowerment in Entrepreneurship and Their Suitability for Collective Contexts. Administrative Sciences 11: 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Zaheer, Hasnain, Yvonne Breyer, and John Dumay. 2019. Digital Entrepreneurship: An Interdisciplinary Structured Literature Review and Research Agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 148: 119735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Zahra, Shaker A., and Mike Wright. 2016. Understanding the Social Role of Entrepreneurship. Journal of Management Studies 53: 610–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Zautra, Alex J., Anne Arewasikporn, and Mary C. Davis. 2010. Resilience: Promoting Well-Being through Recovery, Sustainability, and Growth. Research in Human Development 7: 221–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Zhang, Shaodian, Erin O’ Carrol Bantum, Jason Owen, Suzanne Bakken, and Noémie Elhadad. 2017. Online Cancer Communities as Informatics Intervention for Social Support: Conceptualization, Characterization, and Impact. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 24: 451–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Zhang, Zhe. 2019. Sustained Participation in Virtual Communities from a Self-Determination Perspective. Sustainability 11: 6547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Zheng, Yingqin, and Geoff Walsham. 2008. Inequality of What? Social Exclusion in the E-society as Capability Deprivation. Information Technology & People 21: 222–43. [Google Scholar]
  139. Zimmerman, Marc A. 1995. Psychological Empowerment: Issues and Illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology 23: 581–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Scoping Review Methodology: TDR and PRISMA Integration.
Figure 1. Scoping Review Methodology: TDR and PRISMA Integration.
Admsci 14 00164 g001
Figure 2. Content analysis word cloud: blog support group.
Figure 2. Content analysis word cloud: blog support group.
Admsci 14 00164 g002
Figure 3. Content analysis word cloud: blog and virtual community-blog support groups.
Figure 3. Content analysis word cloud: blog and virtual community-blog support groups.
Admsci 14 00164 g003
Figure 4. Empowerment Framework: Enhancing Well-being for Patients and Entrepreneurs.
Figure 4. Empowerment Framework: Enhancing Well-being for Patients and Entrepreneurs.
Admsci 14 00164 g004
Table 1. Key Themes of Empowerment and Social Implications for Sustainability.
Table 1. Key Themes of Empowerment and Social Implications for Sustainability.
ThemeKey ThemesRelevant Theories, Models, and Studies
Individual
Empowerment
Self-efficacy, autonomy and
self-determination
(Bandura 1997; Maynard et al. 2012)
Community Support and EngagementSocial support, active participation and engagement(Cohen and Wills 1985;
Nahapiet and Ghoshal 2009)
Human and
Intellectual Capital
Collaboration and cooperation,
collective action, knowledge-based drivers and dynamics
(Becker 1964;
Gratton and Ghoshal 2003)
Sustainable PracticesSustainable practices, opportunities, and innovation(Putnam 2000;
Shepherd and Patzelt 2011)
Table 2. Comparison of Entrepreneurship Perspective and Empowered Patients Perspective.
Table 2. Comparison of Entrepreneurship Perspective and Empowered Patients Perspective.
PerspectiveFocus Key FindingsRelevant Literature
EERole of
Empowerment in
Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship fosters personal growth and
empowerment.
(Bacq et al. 2022; Balcazar et al. 2014; Henao-Zapata and Peiró 2018)
EPHRole of
Empowerment in PHM
Empowered patients take active roles in health
decisions.
(Acuña Mora et al. 2022;
Anderson and Funnell 2010; Castro et al. 2016; Lorig and Holman 2003)
SimilaritiesCommonalities
between Entrepreneurs and
Empowered Patients
Both involve individuals taking control of decisions, leading to personal growth and autonomy.(Bandura 1997; Bandura 2001; Sen 2017; Ryan and Deci 2000)
Table 3. Comparative Analysis of Empowerment in PHM (EPH) and Entrepreneurship (EE) vs. Human Capital Economic Progress (HCED).
Table 3. Comparative Analysis of Empowerment in PHM (EPH) and Entrepreneurship (EE) vs. Human Capital Economic Progress (HCED).
PerspectiveFocusKey FindingsRelevant Literature
EPHRole of Empowerment in Health
Decision-Making
Empowered patients contribute to the overall efficiency and effectiveness of health
management.
(Acuña Mora et al. 2022;
Anderson and Funnell 2010; Castro et al. 2016; Lorig and Holman 2003)
EERole of Entrepreneurship in Economic
Development
Entrepreneurship significantly contributes to growth and development.(Bacq et al. 2022; Hart and Milstein 2003; Nambisan 2017; Zahra and Wright 2016)
CommonalitiesSimilarities between Empowered Patients and EntrepreneursIndividual-driven innovation ecosystems emphasize the transformative potential of empowered individuals in shaping the future of service delivery and driving positive outcomes for individuals and society as a whole.(Barker et al. 2018;
Nambisan and Baron 2013;
Cajaiba-Santana 2014;
Shane 2003)
HCEDContributions to
Economic Progress
Empowered patients ultimately contribute to the healthcare system’s efficiency and contribute to sustainable economic growth through improved health outcomes. Entrepreneurs drive economic growth by fostering innovation, job creation, and competitiveness.(Acuña Mora et al. 2022;
Anderson and Funnell 2010; Hart and Milstein 2003;
Panagioti et al. 2014)
Table 4. Comparative Analysis of Intellectual Capital and Economic Development (ICED) vs. Human Capital and Personal Growth (EPG).
Table 4. Comparative Analysis of Intellectual Capital and Economic Development (ICED) vs. Human Capital and Personal Growth (EPG).
PerspectiveHuman Capital and Personal Growth (EPG)Intellectual Capital and Community Development (ICED)
EmpowermentIndividuals gaining control over their lives and circumstances
(Zimmerman 1995)
Empowering individuals within the community
(Perkins and Zimmerman 1995)
Skills and
competences
Skills, knowledge, and abilities of individuals (Becker 1964)Tangible and intangible assets contributing to intellectual wealth
(Stewart 2007)
Dynamic learning capabilityAdaptability and capacity for acquiring new knowledge and skills (Dweck 2006)Processes facilitating knowledge creation and utilization (Teece et al. 1997)
Self-efficacyBeliefs in one’s ability to succeed in specific situations
(Bandura 1997)
Confidence in one’s capacity to contribute effectively
(Bandura 2001; Mou and Lin 2017)
Psychological constructsFactors contributing to well-being and quality of life
(Diener 2012)
Collective well-being and resilience factors (Putnam 2000)
CollaborationWorking together towards common goals (Wenger 2010 )Cooperative efforts for community advancement (Wenger et al. 2002)
Active community engagementInvolvement and participation in community initiatives
(Small et al. 2013; Zhang 2019)
Participation in community decision-making processes
(Snow et al. 2017; Zhang 2019)
Inclusive
development
Ensuring equal opportunities for all community members
(Sen 2017)
Ensuring participation and benefits for all members
(Nowell and Boyd 2014)
Sustainable
development
Promoting economic, social, and environmental progress
(Sachs 2015)
Balanced progress supporting
long-term well-being (Shepherd and Patzelt 2011; Zautra et al. 2010)
Table 5. Content analysis: blog and virtual community-blog support groups.
Table 5. Content analysis: blog and virtual community-blog support groups.
Blog SupportVirtual Community and Blog Support
information16.00group (community)17.27%
health14.00faith/God7.55%
diet12.00support4.32%
treatment10.00Advice3.24%
food7.00Food2.52%
blog5.00Diet2.16%
advice4.00Illness2.52%
care4.00treatment2.16%
pain4.00Health2.16%
situation4.00Care1.80%
therapy4.00strength1.80%
time4.00healing1.44%
body3.00recovery1.44%
condition3.00challenge1.08%
habit3.00depression1.08%
help3.00Pain1.08%
life3.00Change0.72%
nutrition3.00Habit0.72%
support2.00Hope0.72%
Table 6. Thematic Analysis: Identified Patterns from BA and VCBA.
Table 6. Thematic Analysis: Identified Patterns from BA and VCBA.
Empowerment FoundationsEmpowerment Factors
Self-Efficacy Autonomy and Self-Determination
Personal control6%Acceptance, adaptability 6%
Decision making3%Strong sense of purpose1%
Positive attitude6%Spiritual beliefs4%
Personal traits4%Active Participation and Engagement
Psychological strength5%Lurking6%
Resilience3%Emotional engagement4%
Social Support: Collective Action
Relational support2%Social impact5%
Strong social support7%Psychological impact7%
Collaboration and Cooperation Physical and intellectual impact8%
Enabling others6%Opportunities and Innovation
Empowerment Group3%Healthy lifestyle5%
Education
Access to information4%
Health literacy2%
Effective information10%
Note: Bold and italic are used to emphasize major categories and headers such as “Empowerment Foundations” and “Empowerment Factors” to make them stand out clearly.
Table 7. Empowerment Factors and Foundations.
Table 7. Empowerment Factors and Foundations.
Process Foundation Factor
Individual Empowerment (IE)Self-efficacyAutonomy and self-determination
Individual Engagement (IEG)Social SupportActive Participation and
Engagement
Community Development (CD)Collaboration and cooperationCollective Action
Sustainable Practices (SP)EducationOpportunities and innovation
Overall stagesResource
management
Access to resources
Overall stagesInformationKnowledge and understanding
Table 8. Empowerment Stages and SDGs.
Table 8. Empowerment Stages and SDGs.
StageInterrelated SDGs
Individual Empowerment (IE)SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 4 (Quality Education)
Individual Engagement (IEG)SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities)
Community Development (CD)SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions), SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)
Sustainable Practices
(SP)
SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 15 (Life on Land)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hurtado Illanes, M. Exploring Shared Challenges of Empowered Patients and Entrepreneurs: Towards Diversity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship in Post-Crisis Contexts. Adm. Sci. 2024, 14, 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14080164

AMA Style

Hurtado Illanes M. Exploring Shared Challenges of Empowered Patients and Entrepreneurs: Towards Diversity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship in Post-Crisis Contexts. Administrative Sciences. 2024; 14(8):164. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14080164

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hurtado Illanes, Marisol. 2024. "Exploring Shared Challenges of Empowered Patients and Entrepreneurs: Towards Diversity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship in Post-Crisis Contexts" Administrative Sciences 14, no. 8: 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14080164

APA Style

Hurtado Illanes, M. (2024). Exploring Shared Challenges of Empowered Patients and Entrepreneurs: Towards Diversity, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship in Post-Crisis Contexts. Administrative Sciences, 14(8), 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14080164

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop