Integrating sufficiency and configurational logics to explain social entrepreneurship intention: evidence from Vietnam

Purpose Why do young individuals with strong moral convictions not always develop social entrepreneurship intention (SEI)? This study aims to address this paradox by examining how moral identity aligns with social, human and cultural capital, as well as entrepreneurial self-efficacy, in shaping SEI in an emerging economy. Beyond theory, the study situates this paradox within the broader practical challenges of youth employment, inclusive innovation and sustainable development in Vietnam. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 800 Vietnamese university students. A dual-logic approach was applied that integrates prediction-oriented Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (n = 400) with fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) (n = 400). PLS-SEM identifies dominant net associations and mediation patterns that explain variance in SEI, whereas fsQCA uncovers alternative configurations of identity and resource conditions that are sufficient for SEI. Findings PLS-SEM results reveal a dominant associational pathway in which moral identity is linked to social capital, social capital is linked to entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial self-efficacy co-occurs with SEI. fsQCA complements these insights by identifying multiple equifinal pathways, including configurations where cultural capital is weak or absent but high SEI is still observed alongside particular alignments of moral identity, human capital, social capital and self-efficacy. Together, these findings suggest that moral conviction relates to entrepreneurial intention through different context-dependent resource and efficacy alignments. Originality/value This study develops and applies the SEI Compass Framework as an integrative organizing framework rather than a standalone theory. The framework conceptualizes SEI as a multi-pathway orientation that bridges variance-based and configurational logics. Theoretically, it clarifies how moral identity theory can be organized alongside capital-based and efficacy-based explanations of social entrepreneurship. Practically, it offers intention-focused insights for universities and policymakers to design differentiated capacity-building programs that strengthen moral reflection, capability development, network access and context-sensitive support.