No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Social Innovation – Social Challenges and Future Research Fields
Abstract
The article at hand discusses social innovations as an increasingly significant subject of discourse within civil society.
Based on a growing awareness of the limited problem-solving potential of technological innovations, established control and
problem-solving routines, the authors point out the necessity of social innovations. They argue that social innovations will
become increasingly important, particularly with regard to the preservation and expansion of innovative capability in companies
and societies. Their central thesis is that a paradigm shift is taking place in the innovation system as we transition from
an industrial to a knowledge and service society, as a result of which the relationship between technological and social innovations
is changing in favor of the latter. At the same time the article criticizes the fact that the debate on national and regional
innovation systems deals mainly with the structural, political and institutional requirements for innovative capability at
a national and regional level, while social innovation as an independent innovation type is considered only in passing. In
order to remedy this situation, the authors first examine the question of what makes an innovation a social innovation, focusing
among other things on the connection between social innovation and social change and the diffusion of social innovations.
In the next step, they discuss trends and future research areas of social innovation, and analyze how social innovations can
contribute to dealing with global dilemmas.
... Shifting towards a more human-centred approach in regional development [5] places emphasis on social inclusion and responsible resource utilization, aligning with the United Nations' sustainable development goals [6,7]. Central to this transition is the concept of collaboration, both as a catalyst and a product of social innovation [6,8]. ...
... Shifting towards a more human-centred approach in regional development [5] places emphasis on social inclusion and responsible resource utilization, aligning with the United Nations' sustainable development goals [6,7]. Central to this transition is the concept of collaboration, both as a catalyst and a product of social innovation [6,8]. Collaboration has been acknowledged as a pivotal means for mobilizing resources towards achieving societal objectives [2]. ...
... Social innovation, characterized by its intangibility [2,3] contrasts with technological innovation. Research has therefore highlighted the necessity of implementing social ideas and inventions within social systems, emphasizing collaborative efforts as both the source and result of social innovation [6,8]. In this context, collaboration is defined as a resource-mobilizing action for achieving social goals [2]. ...
... On the other end of the spectrum, this may involve the creation of new processes and procedures for structuring collaborative work; new social practices within group/s, or the development of new business practices . Therefore, social innovation not only includes the development of new products or services with a clear social aim, but also changes in behaviors, processes, and routines (Howaldt and Schwarz 2011). ...
... Some scholars define social innovation as a process (e.g. Dawson and Daniel 2010;Gerometta, Haussermann, and Longo 2005;Hochgerner 2013;Howaldt and Schwarz 2011) while others view it as an outcome Haugh and Kitson 2007;Mulgan, Tucker, Ali, and Sanders 2007). Although the definitions provided by these authors rely on different concepts, they are heavily cognate and within the same conceptual field, characterized by a loosely defined scope (Howaldt and Schwarz 2011). ...
... Dawson and Daniel 2010;Gerometta, Haussermann, and Longo 2005;Hochgerner 2013;Howaldt and Schwarz 2011) while others view it as an outcome Haugh and Kitson 2007;Mulgan, Tucker, Ali, and Sanders 2007). Although the definitions provided by these authors rely on different concepts, they are heavily cognate and within the same conceptual field, characterized by a loosely defined scope (Howaldt and Schwarz 2011). The lack of consensus regarding the meaning of social innovation has contributed to significant fragmentation of the field. ...
LINK TO THE SITE: https://www.igi-global.com/book/theoretical-practical-approaches-social-innovation/244507 ----------
Social innovation is identified as a mechanism response to burning social challenges and the evolution of hybrid organizations such as social enterprises. As a result, there is an overwhelming growing interest among researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to know more about the significant concept of social innovation. Despite this significance, it is often argued that the meaning of social innovation is ambiguous and vague with theory lagging social innovation practice as the field is nascent, emerging, and remains underdeveloped. This may impede the research endeavors of conceptualizing and establishing its socio-economic underpinnings and the legitimization of the field.
Theoretical and Practical Approaches to Social Innovation illuminates and consolidates multiple views of social innovation theory, research, and practice, which to date have not been presented in one publication. The book provides an in-depth theoretical and practical understanding coupled with an assessment of the current research in multidisciplinary perspectives complemented by case studies representing each knowledge cluster in social innovation research. In this unique way, this book links theory to practice demonstrating praxis. While highlighting topics such as social enterprise, urban studies, management, ecological resilience, and social policy and networks, this book is ideal for students, academics, practitioners, researchers, and entrepreneurs looking to expand their knowledge, skills, and passion, and to sustainably pursue their social missions to bring about real social change that can transform communities and ignite innovative approaches to solving social challenges.
... Autores como Mulgan (2006), Mulgan, Tucker, Ali y Sanders (2007), Moulaert, Martinelli, González y Swyngedouw (2007) y Phills, Deiglmeier y Miller (2008) han aportado definiciones al concepto de innovación social que se constituyen en referentes clave para los actuales investigadores que estudian el tema. Sin embargo, muchos de ellos coinciden en que el concepto de innovación social es amplio y aún no ha llegado a un consenso definitivo en cuanto a su alcance y operacionalización (Bonifacio, 2014;Sanzo Pérez, Álvarez González & Rey García, 2015;Klein, 2013;Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011, Bulut, Eren & Halac, 2013, siendo necesario el desarrollo de revisiones de literatura que contribuyan a darle claridad. ...
... Desde la década anterior se ha venido desarrollando fuertemente el concepto de innovación social (figura 6, ítems construcción del concepto), cuyos estudios incluyen trabajos desarrollados por universidades como Stanford, Duke, Québec y Harvard, y por organizaciones dedicadas a la innovación social, como Nesta, Zentrum für Soziale Innovation y la Fundación Joven(Lehtola & Ståhle, 2014). No obstante, el concepto de innovación social ha sido heterogéneo y presenta límites poco definidos(Bonifacio, 2014;Sanzo Pérez et al., 2015;Klein, 2013;Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011;Bulut et al., 2013).El primero en hablar de innovación social fue Mumford(2002)y la definió como la generación e implementación de nuevas ideas sobre cómo las personas deben organizar las interacciones interpersonales o sociales para alcanzar los objetivos comunes. Para el año 2007, Mulgan et al. generan una mayor claridad al concepto, sosteniendo que la innovación social es el desarrollo e implementación de nuevas ideas (productos, servicios y modelos) para satisfacer las necesidades sociales; sin embargo, es explícito en afirmar que la aplicación de este concepto es predominante en organizaciones cuyos fines principales son sociales. ...
The social innovation concept was developed in 2006, which is why it is considered a new term in the construction stage. This article aims to present the beginning, evolution, and current trends of social innovation, in addition to showing the seminal authors and those with the highest number of publications, journals with publication trends on the subject, the methodologies used, and the countries that support this research. The methodology consisted of a literature systematic review through its bibliometric analysis with the application of graph theory. Among the most outstanding findings is that the concept is heterogeneous without defined limits. Its analysis was generated at four levels: general, macro, meso, and micro, each with its internal tendencies. However, there are still methodological deficiencies related to theoretical frameworks for the concept of investigation and the absence of sectorial studies with specific cases that show the application of social innovation.
... Autores como Mulgan (2006), Mulgan, Tucker, Ali y Sanders (2007), Moulaert, Martinelli, González y Swyngedouw (2007) y Phills, Deiglmeier y Miller (2008) han aportado definiciones al concepto de innovación social que se constituyen en referentes clave para los actuales investigadores que estudian el tema. Sin embargo, muchos de ellos coinciden en que el concepto de innovación social es amplio y aún no ha llegado a un consenso definitivo en cuanto a su alcance y operacionalización (Bonifacio, 2014;Sanzo Pérez, Álvarez González & Rey García, 2015;Klein, 2013;Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011, Bulut, Eren & Halac, 2013, siendo necesario el desarrollo de revisiones de literatura que contribuyan a darle claridad. ...
... Desde la década anterior se ha venido desarrollando fuertemente el concepto de innovación social (figura 6, ítems construcción del concepto), cuyos estudios incluyen trabajos desarrollados por universidades como Stanford, Duke, Québec y Harvard, y por organizaciones dedicadas a la innovación social, como Nesta, Zentrum für Soziale Innovation y la Fundación Joven(Lehtola & Ståhle, 2014). No obstante, el concepto de innovación social ha sido heterogéneo y presenta límites poco definidos(Bonifacio, 2014;Sanzo Pérez et al., 2015;Klein, 2013;Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011;Bulut et al., 2013).El primero en hablar de innovación social fue Mumford(2002)y la definió como la generación e implementación de nuevas ideas sobre cómo las personas deben organizar las interacciones interpersonales o sociales para alcanzar los objetivos comunes. Para el año 2007, Mulgan et al. generan una mayor claridad al concepto, sosteniendo que la innovación social es el desarrollo e implementación de nuevas ideas (productos, servicios y modelos) para satisfacer las necesidades sociales; sin embargo, es explícito en afirmar que la aplicación de este concepto es predominante en organizaciones cuyos fines principales son sociales. ...
El concepto de innovación social se ha desarrollado desde el año 2006, por lo que es considerado un término novedoso que se encuentra en etapa de construcción. Este artículo tiene como objetivo dar a conocer el inicio, evolución y tendencias actuales de la innovación social, además de mostrar los autores seminales y con mayor número de publicaciones, las revistas con tendencias de publicación del tema, las metodologías utilizadas y los países que apoyan estas investigaciones. La metodología empleada consistió en una revisión sistemática de la literatura a través del análisis bibliométrico con aplicación de la teoría de grafos. Dentro de los hallazgos más sobresalientes, se encontró que el concepto de innovación social es heterogéneo y sin límites definidos, y que su análisis se está generando en cuatro niveles: general, macro, meso y micro, cada uno con sus tendencias internas. Sin embargo, se presentan aún deficiencias metodológicas, relacionadas con marcos teóricos para la investigación del concepto y ausencia de estudios sectoriales con casos específicos que evidencien la aplicación de la innovación social.
... Since then numerous projects and publications have developed this idea further (Pel et al., 2019;Ziegler, 2017;Jaeger-Erben et al., 2015;Grimm et al., 2013). Albeit the eclectic interest on the theme and the various proposed definitions (Haxeltine et al., 2017;Jaeger-Erben et al., 2015;Phills et al., 2008;Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011;Moulaert et al., 2007;Mulgan, 2006;Mumford, 2002), there is a shared focus on the concern for solutions to social-ecological problems (Lawrence et al., 2014). ...
... Despite the attempts to define a general theory of SI for changing consumption patterns (Jaeger-Erben and Rückert-John, 2016; Moulaert et al., 2013;Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011), most of the English written literature refers to cases from Europe or North America. 1 The importance of the role of contextual and situational factors on the success of social innovations cannot be neglected. For instance, Van den Heiligenberg et al. (2017) claim that success factors of sustainability innovations are related to the experiment itself and the habitat in which the experiment takes place. ...
Social innovations for sustainable consumption have attracted policymakers' attention internationally as a possible means to reach sustainability and climate change goals. So far, most of the research on the emergence and potential of social innovations has been carried out in the Global North. Consequentially, some theoretical approaches and concepts have not been reviewed critically for their applicability in other contexts. This paper explores similarities and differences in the emergence and development process of social innovations for sustainable consumption in different cultural and geographical contexts to fill this gap. The objective is to enrich current concepts with more context-sensitive categories. On this account, the paper undertakes an explorative qualitative crosscountry analysis of innovations for sustainable consumption in diverse sectors, using a sample of 87 cases collected by desk research in Brazil, Germany, and Iran. The analysis is based on a procedural perspective on innovation and refers to the three phases problematization, experimentation, and restabilization. The research shows that, in the problematization phase, the initiatives differ in taking up "globalized" challenges affecting most countries worldwide versus "locally emerged" ones, more connected to socioeconomic , cultural, or political specifics. Experimentation with possible solutions differentiates between "imported" versus "locally" invented or appropriated context-specific approaches. Forms and degrees of restabilization depend mainly on framings for start-ups or non-governmental organizations and the local government's openness for innovative approaches. Based on the manifestation of these characteristics, the analyses result in four different qualitative types. The identified categories complement existing typologies, which so far neglect the geopolitical scope of the addressed problems and the tested solutions. Further empirical analyses in different countries will show whether the identified categories and types are helpful for a better understanding of the emergence and development of social innovations for sustainable consumption in different socioeconomic , geopolitical, and cultural contexts.
... Since then numerous projects and publications have developed this idea further (Pel et al., 2019;Ziegler, 2017;Jaeger-Erben et al., 2015;Grimm et al., 2013). Albeit the eclectic interest on the theme and the various proposed definitions (Haxeltine et al., 2017;Jaeger-Erben et al., 2015;Phills et al., 2008;Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011;Moulaert et al., 2007;Mulgan, 2006;Mumford, 2002), there is a shared focus on the concern for solutions to social-ecological problems (Lawrence et al., 2014). ...
... Despite the attempts to define a general theory of SI for changing consumption patterns (Jaeger-Erben and Rückert-John, 2016; Moulaert et al., 2013;Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011), most of the English written literature refers to cases from Europe or North America. 1 The importance of the role of contextual and situational factors on the success of social innovations cannot be neglected. For instance, Van den Heiligenberg et al. (2017) claim that success factors of sustainability innovations are related to the experiment itself and the habitat in which the experiment takes place. ...
... Therefore, for instance, the European Union puts "great hopes in social innovation to design and implement creative ways of meeting social needs and to build cohesive and sustainable societies" [3] (437). There have been many attempts to define the term "social innovation" [5][6][7]. In this paper, the authors apply the definition offered by Jaeger-Erben and her colleagues [6] (785) and consider social innovations "as alternative practices or new variations of practices which differ substantially from established or mainstream routines". ...
... Research on SISC has been mostly conducted in developed countries, and there is still a lack of such research considering the Global South context [5]. SISC could be solutions for (at least) some of the current environmental and social issues of the Global South (e.g., air pollution and traffic congestion or social inequalities in a city such as Tehran [10,11]). ...
Against the backdrop of current sustainability problems, various social innovations for sustainable consumption are emerging across the globe. In order to explore the sustainability potentials of such initiatives, it is vital to understand (1) why consumers are accepting and joining these initiatives and (2) how they perceive the sustainability potentials of initiatives’ offers. In order to correctly estimate the sustainability potential of the initiatives, one should consider possible negative sustainability impacts as well as rebound effects alongside all the positive sustainability effects. Moreover, studies on social innovations for sustainable consumption have mostly been conducted in the context of the Global North. This paper focuses on studying and understanding the current situation of social innovations for sustainable consumption and its sustainability potentials in Tehran, Iran. A qualitative explorative study was conducted using desk research as well as semi-structured in-depth interviews with Iranian consumers. The results of this study confirm the existence of growing supply and demand trends for such initiatives in Iran. Among the different initiatives, those that are copies of international companies or offering alternative mobility solutions seem to have more chances for diffusion, as consumers are more motivated to use their offers. The sample of this study believed that by joining these initiatives, they could contribute to achieving greater sustainability. However, the results of the interviews also show that the possible negative sustainability and rebound effects of their engagement in such initiatives were often neglected. Therefore, there is still a need not only for educating consumers about the overall sustainability potentials of these initiatives but also for exhibiting the sustainability impacts that their consumption behaviors regarding the use of initiatives’ offers can have. This way, these initiatives can be more successful in terms of contributing to sustainability.
... It is important to note that social innovation should be objective and avoid biased or emotional language Contribution from technology to the SI: (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2010) The impact of the digital revolution on social innovation has been significant. Technology, including mobile applications, online platforms, and social networks, has enabled the development of innovative solutions to address social challenges, such as online education, telemedicine, and community empowerment Approach from sustainability: (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011;Meissner & Kotsemir, 2016) Sustainability, encompassing both environmental and economic considerations, has become increasingly significant in the realm of social innovation. There has been a notable trend toward solutions that not only tackle social issues, but are also financially sustainable in the long run and environmentally conscious IS in COVID-19 pandemic ...
The purpose of this chapter is to explore the interaction between sustainable resource management and social innovation as key factors in promoting productive inclusion in Colombia. The methodology used is based on an exhaustive bibliographic review of academic articles, public policy reports, and case studies selected from prestigious databases such as Scopus and Google Scholar, applying criteria of relevance, timeliness, and scientific rigor. The main findings indicate that, in the Latin American context, the bioeconomy is positioned as a crucial strategy for the sustainable use of resources. Concrete examples of success, such as agro-industrial projects and the application of advanced technologies, demonstrate the capacity of the bioeconomy to promote job creation and improve efficiency in various economic sectors. In addition, social innovation is identified as an essential catalyst for economic and social transformation. Collaboration between the public and private sectors, supported by proactive government policies, has led to the emergence of social enterprises and community projects aimed at addressing critical challenges, contributing significantly to reducing inequalities and strengthening the social fabric. Within this framework, the integration of the bioeconomy and social innovation stands out as a comprehensive approach to promote productive inclusion and equity in Colombia, increasing economic prosperity and equity while promoting a sustainable development model that reconciles economic progress with environmental conservation. In conclusion, the study highlights the importance of this collaboration between the bioeconomy and social innovation to ensure a promising future for future generations, promoting economic development that respects and preserves the environment. It shows that the convergence of these two approaches not only addresses immediate economic and social challenges but also lays the foundations for long-term sustainable and equitable growth.
... Later, sociologists such as Wolfgang Zapf (1989) and Jürgen Howald and colleagues (Howaldt et al., 2022;Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011;Howaldt & Schwarz, 2021) emphasized that social innovations are distinct phenomena with autonomous aspects and specifics rather than merely being a starting point for, side effect of, or outcome of technological innovation. They advocated for a sociological conceptualization of social innovations, differentiating it from technological innovation on the one hand and from the broader sociological concept of social change on the other hand. ...
This article focuses on understanding social innovations in Lusatia from a life-world perspective. Ethnographic case studies in two small towns explore people’s perspectives on transformation, particularly its impact. The analysis critically assesses the concept of social innovation, revealing implicit, often unreflected assumptions. Drawing on sociological perspectives, the article challenges notions of intentional change management and normative progress, instead emphasizing the complexity of social practices. It suggests that promoting social innovations requires nuanced understanding and context sensitivity for local communities, acknowledging diverse experiences shaping responses to change.
... The social innovation process is explained by changes in attitudes, behaviour or perceptions (Cajaiba-Santana, 2014;Neumeier, 2012). This process begins with an idea of a social nature that will be implemented through collaboration to generate interactions between actors within a social system (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011). This collaboration requires the buy-in and cooperation of various stakeholders (Rao-Nicholson et al., 2017;Steinfield & Holt, 2019) to formalize new social change beliefs. ...
The aim of this research is to highlight the role of manager's profile in the adoption of social innovation in industrial companies. It has used a quantitative methodology, with a questionnaire administered to 176 managers of Cameroonian industrial companies. The results of the hypotheses tests were derived from the multifactorial ANOVA and multiple linear regression analyses. The results show that among the sociodemographic profile variables, only the level of education and experience of the managers have a significant effect on social innovation, unlike gender and age which have no effect. In addition, the manager's personal values contribute to the adoption of social innovation through his ethical values and community ownership. The study therefore offers relevant implications for managers and owners of industrial companies who aspire to consider social innovation in their offerings to meet profitability objectives and create positive social impact.
... Говальдт Я., Шварц М. [16] Нова комбінація та/або нова конфігурація соціальних практик у певних сферах діяльності або соціальних контекстах. ...
The article examines the nature and evolution of knowledge about constructs and concepts in the field of social innovation. With the help of multidisciplinary ontological analysis and the use of bibliometric indicators, such as citations, co-citations, bibliometric links and coincidences, the main research trends in knowledge about social innovation and social entrepreneurship are identified through systematic mapping, analysis and synthesis of publications on social innovation for a deep theoretical and practical understanding, as well as evaluation of current research at the interdisciplinary level.A theoretical generalization and systematization of scientific approaches to the definition of the concept of "social innovation" is carried out. The essence of social innovations in entrepreneurship is analyzed. A combination of empirical and theoretical research methods is used: methods of analysis, synthesis and generalization for scientific substantiation of theoretical and methodological approaches to the introduction of social innovations in public life. It is established that the existing concepts in the field of social innovations have a fragmented conceptualization and different understandings by scientists, politicians and practitioners.The current state of Ukraine in terms of opportunities for the spread of social innovations and the creation of conditions for social entrepreneurship in the context of post-war recovery of Ukraine is analyzed. It is established that there is an urgent need to improve the current legislation in the field of innovation, develop effective mechanisms for implementing innovations and managing innovation, ensure transparent financing methods and effective state and public control.It is determined that an effective approach to solving social problems in the context of post-war recovery is to combine the measures of the current social policy of the State in Ukraine, limited by the organizational and financial participation of the State, with the possibilities of public participation and entrepreneurial activity.It is proved that the post-war recovery of Ukraine should provide for the promotion of social entrepreneurship and the implementation of social innovations for effective cooperation between the State, business and the public to jointly address a set of challenges, solve socio-economic problems, and implement reforms.
... 13 D. Conrad interprets social innovation as "responding to social challenges that cannot be solved through traditional approaches, often requiring new forms of cooperation and involving "co-creation" and "co-production" between citizens and institutional actors." 14 Given the multidisciplinary nature of the study of social innovations, there are different interpretations of this concept: Nordberg K, Mariusen A, Virkkala S., 15 Leitheiser S., Vollmann A., 16 Avelino F., Wittmeyer J., Pel B., Weaver P., et al., 17 Slee B. 18 , Nicholls A and Ziegler R., 19 Terstriep J., Kleverbeck M., Deserti A. and Rizzo F., 20 Cajaiba-Santana G., 21 Manzini E., 22 Moulaert F., MacCallum D. and Hillier J., 23 Martinelli F., 24 Howaldt J. and Schwarz M., 25 Westley F and Antadze N., 26 Pol E. and Ville S., 27 Phills Jr. J., Deiglmeier K. and Miller D., 28 Hämäläinen T. and Heiskala R., 29 Mulgan G., 30 Moulaert F., MacCallum D., Mehmood A. and Hamdouch A., 31 Mumford M. 32 Most authors from the above sources argue that social challenges are better addressed through social innovation rather than technological innovation. Since the goal of social innovations is the public good, while technological innovations are mainly aimed at making a profit. ...
Global experiences of post-war and post-conflict recovery and reconstruction
show that preparations for the post-war period should begin even before the conflict ends. For Ukraine's post-war recovery, promoting social entrepreneurship and implementing social innovations is crucial. These efforts will foster practical cooperation between the state, businesses, and the public, addressing various challenges collectively, solving socio-economic problems, and implementing reforms.
The purpose of this article is to study the essence and evolution of knowledge about constructs and concepts in the fields of social innovation and social entrepreneurship, to substantiate the opportunities for the dissemination of social innovations, and to create conditions for social entrepreneurship in addressing social needs in the context of Ukraine's post-war recovery.
Given its fragmented conceptualisation and widespread use by scholars, policymakers, and practitioners, this study is driven by the need for a theoretical justification of social innovation and entrepreneurship.
... Говальдт Я., Шварц М. [16] Нова комбінація та/або нова конфігурація соціальних практик у певних сферах діяльності або соціальних контекстах. ...
... For theoretical approaches, Open Innovation, Socio-technical, Social Innovation and Triple helix have been used. Open Innovation and triple helix have been selected for their relevance in the discussions on innovation systems (Huizingh, 2011;Cooke, 2005), while the transitions approaches (Markard, et al. 2012) here analyzed from the socio-technical transition and social innovation (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011) have been chosen for their emerging character in the literature of the last two decades, hoping to understand the relationship of these theories with the concepts of quadruple and quintuple helix. ...
This article analyzes the conceptual structure of the field of study of innovation systems through the establishment of subfields of knowledge using text mining. The data was sourced from the Web of Science in a search through Boolean operators under the concept “innovation systems” obtaining 6,706 articles in august 2020. For the analysis, a dictionary of categories has been constructed that agglomerate conceptually close families of words comprising keywords, theoretical and geographical approaches. Additionally, the QDA Miner & Wordstat software has been used to exploit the data. As results, it is possible to identify the central role of the concepts of triple helix and open innovation in the field of study of innovation systems; in the same way, it is possible to identify that the concepts of quadruple and quintuple helix related to the greater relevance of social and environmental issues on the agenda emerge strongly. And although the most discussed issues correspond to knowledge transfer, the science, and the economic development; the hottest issues result from the dynamics of innovation systems, its performance, and collaboration actions. Socio-technological changes in the innovation systems, mainly in North America, become less relevant as research interest, while new discussions arise in Europe and Africa on social and environmental sustainability issues. Public policies for innovation systems, management associated with new business models, and sustainability are topics of greatest interest for research. In this way the conceptual structure of the field and subfields of study of innovation systems is explained from the different visualizations through word clusters, the graphic representation of matrices and dendrograms.
... Social innovations are not only considered good for society, but also for improving society's ability to act (Caulier-Grice et al., 2012). They range from new ideas to the creation of new processes and procedures and occur only when a social idea or invention is implemented, accepted, and integrated into a social system, i.e., when it contributes to human and social life (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011). More recently, Pel et al. (2020) explicitly referred to social innovation as a socially constructed entity relying on specific socio-material context defined as the people, materials and technologies, institutional rules, and their interactions. ...
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is expected to play a significant transformative role for a better society and collective well-being in line with the goals of the 2030 Agenda UN. To drive social innovation, AI must be built on ethical principles and human-centred values. The link between AI, ethics, and social innovation is quite unexplored in the literature and has never been more relevant as European countries develop national plans for post-pandemic recovery. In Italy, the Plan for Recovery and Resilience (PNRR) identifies AI as a strategic asset for investment in all sectors to support the country's transition to a more digital and sustainable economy and an inclusive society. This paper explains the role of ethical AI in the context of ecological and digital transformation, which is at the heart of the Italian Recovery Plan - Next Generation EU for Italy. It expands knowledge on the transformative role of AI in management studies; it provides highlights to policy makers for the development of socially oriented AI from a service ecosystem perspective.
... According to van der Have and Rubalcaba (2016), such studies aim to better understand the emergence and implementation of social innovations. Howaldt and Schwarz (2011) posited that social innovation occurs only when a social idea or invention is implemented (through planned and coordinated action), accepted and incorporated into a social system-that is, when it contributes to human and social life. Similarly, Mumford (2002) noted a few years earlier that social innovation ranges from new ideas to the creation of new processes and procedures affecting interactions between people within a social system. ...
Academics, policymakers and society at large are calling for solutions to societal problems. Digital platforms are a promising means to this end, as they can drive social innovation at a scale and pace previously unimaginable. To date, little attention has been paid to how technologies facilitate social change and lead actors to solve social problems over time. This study explores how digital platforms foster the development of successful social innovation practices to improve the process of social change and well‐being. It adopts a qualitative, in‐depth case study approach and focuses on RomAltruista, a so‐called social mission platform that promotes flexible volunteering. The study contributes to the literature by providing a framework for understanding the opportunities and role of platforms as cornerstones of successful social innovation practices.
... In general, social innovation is "the way to handle social issues [8]" "sustainable and fair solution that can affect society overall [9]" or "the activities to satisfy social demands [10]". Particularly, social innovation is discussed in sociology as a way of resolving local development, public health, climate change, etc. ...
The traditional concept of innovation focuses on significant changes in products and services. However, today’s innovation derived from the digital economy environment is transforming our way of life, values, and even social relations. The economic benefits of the digital economy and technology have a wide range of impacts derived from the rapid socio-economic transformation. The negative impact on jobs and incomes is a typical problem that threatens socioeconomic fundamentals. This phenomenon is the reason that we must have a new perspective about innovation that connects technology, economy, society and policy beyond the traditional perspective. Based on the new perspective, this study categorizes social innovations using an expanded concept. One of them is “adaptive social innovation”, and this study focuses on its key motive and impact. In this paper, a theoretical discussion is adopted from integrating discussions in macroeconomics, social psychology, political science, etc. The key motive can be found in transformation of production, consumption, and distribution due to the digital economy. Based on this, the detailed operation mechanism of adaptive social innovation that transforms public perceptions and systems are analysed. At the same time, the process in which formal institutions and the output of adaptive social innovation, affect society and policy was explored.
... The majority of the innovations were technology-related in that they used a digital platform, emphasized digital tools or capabilities, or were dependent to some extent on digital resources (notably the OER projects), but categorising them as technological or initiatives, in this way. Technology has clearly facilitated such developments as new ways of doing things, but the real significance of these altered practices is social rather than technical, and derives from the way they have expanded and changed interactions, transactions and communications in their respective communities (Howaldt & Schwarz, 2011). ...
Introduces 17 case studies of educational innovations in academic libraries from teaching-oriented and research-intensive institutions in the USA, UK, Ireland and the Netherlands. Academic libraries have always played a vital part in the educational mission of their institutions, but their learning and teaching role has grown and diversified with the continual expansion of higher education, advances in technology, changes in pedagogy, pressures on budgets and resources, and turbulence in politics and society. Examples illustrate reframing information literacy for diverse contexts, aligning library initiatives with institutional goals, collaborating strategically in disciplinary settings and in library spaces, leadership and partnership in developing open educational resources, reorganising for stakeholder engagement, professional development tools for teaching librarians and approaching educational innovation as a social process. Cross-cutting themes include the progressive integration of academic, information and digital literacies; a focus on supporting students through educational transitions; and the role of reflection in learning and teaching.
... While social change and social innovation are often put together, they are related but different concepts. Indeed, social innovation is necessarily intentional, whereas social change (whether good or bad) can occur unintentionally (Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011). When successful, social innovation may result in social change. ...
The aim of this research is to explore the dynamics and impact of open social innovation, within the context of fab labs and makerspaces. Using an exploratory methodology based on 12 semi‐structured interviews of fab lab founders belonging to The Centres for Maker Innovation and Technology (CMIT) programme – a network of 170 fab labs located in Eastern Europe – this research explores the impact of an adopting an open approach in relation to the different stages of social innovation (prompts, proposals, prototypes, sustaining, scaling and diffusion, systemic change) as well as social impact. The main results of this study are that while the CMIT programme provided each fab lab with similar initial conditions (identical funding, objectives and rules), the open social innovation approached adopted enabled to give birth to a wide diversity of fab labs, each being very well adapted to the local environment, social needs and constraints and able to deliver social impact in just a matter of years; a result that would be hard to achieve with a centralised top‐down approach. The study identified three types of CMITs – Education, Industry and Residential – which could be similar or different depending on the stage of social open innovation. Furthermore, this paper discusses the main difficulties social entrepreneurs encounter as a part of the open social innovation process, as well as means to overcome them. In this respect, this study adds to the literature on fab labs by providing more comprehensive view of the challenges faced by fab labs (and makerspaces) founders, as well as suggestions of strategies enabling to ensure their long‐term sustainability.
... Policy actors have also become interested in the potential of social innovations to introduce or enhance change towards sustainable consumption and seek ways of promoting these initiatives and enlarging their sustainability effects (compare, for example, Barroso, 2011;BEPA, 2010;Rockefeller Foundation, 2007). Thus far, the term "social innovation" has been quite heterogeneously defined in theory and practice (Klein, 2013;Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011). It is applied to a great variety of bottom-up initiatives, organizational settings as well as innovative services which are also described with terms like collaborative consumption, sharing economy, communing and prosuming (Heinrichs and Grunenberg, 2012;Ostrom, 2011;Botsman and Rogers, 2010;Jackson, 2009). ...
... As our findings illustrate, a particular strength of NFP social ventures is their ability to successfully acquire, assimilate, transform and exploit user knowledge. User knowledge is considered to be a vital part of the innovation process (von Hippel, 2001, von Hippel, 1988 and so it comprises a fundamental input to the social innovation process (Mulgan, 2006, Howaldt andSchwarz, 2011). The locallyembedded communitarian nature of many NFP social ventures (Goldsmith et al., 2010, Haugh, 2007 therefore requires that user knowledge and other contextual information is considered carefully in order that innovations effectively meet the needs of their intended beneficiaries. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 the Organization are critical to this process as they provide the mechanisms for acquiring knowledge and socialising it within the organisation where it is recombined with other flows of knowledge. ...
Research into the phenomenon of social innovation has long focused on what it is and why people become engaged in this form of behaviour. However, another piece of the theoretical jigsaw requires understanding how this type of innovation is enacted by organisations. This article looks at the means by which not-for-profit ventures pursuing socially innovative activities develop the necessary capabilities to innovate. The multidimensional theoretical construct of absorptive capacity and the evolutionary economics concept of organisational routines are used to analyse 14 case studies of innovative not-for-profit ventures in Australia and the UK. The results show that these organisations have a unique mediating function in the social innovation process by configuring internal and external absorptive capacity routines to combine user and technological knowledge flows. The article concludes by proposing some research directions for those taking forward the study of social innovation.
... Policy actors have also become interested in the potential of social innovations to introduce or enhance change towards sustainable consumption and seek ways of promoting these initiatives and enlarging their sustainability effects (compare, for example, Barroso, 2011; BEPA, 2010; Rockefeller Foundation, 2007 ). Thus far, the term " social innovation " has been quite heterogeneously defined in theory and practice (Klein, 2013; Howaldt and Schwarz, 2011). It is applied to a great variety of bottom-up initiatives, organizational settings as well as innovative services which are also described with terms like collaborative consumption, sharing economy, communing and prosuming (Heinrichs and Grunenberg, 2012; Ostrom, 2011; Botsman and Rogers, 2010; Jackson, 2009 ). ...
The current political debate in Europe ascribes importance to social innovations in regard to the transformation toward a sustainable society. Social innovation refers to utterly diverse phenomenon like citizen’s communities, cooperatives, transition towns and intercultural gardens, new forms of participation as well as user- and consumer-driven innovations. In regard to consumption there is the hope that carbon-intensive and non-sustainable patterns will be transformed towards more sustainable practices. However it is often not clear how to understand the term social innovation – most definition-esteems fall short because they are not different from usual economic definitions or rely on an obsolete idea of technique trying to mark a difference between social and technical innovation. Before looking at sustainable consumption one has to answer questions about the meaning of social innovations, which are the criteria for the observation and analysis of diverse innovative consumption phenomenons.
These questions are currently investigated by the project “Sustainable consumption by social innovation. Concepts and practice” funded by the German Federal Ministry of Environment and the Federal Environment Agency. Hereby 50 cases of social innovations within several consumption fields are closely investigated.
This paper presents considerations on the understanding of social innovation as the base for a typology of social innovations for sustainable consumption, which will be introduced. Social innovations are understood as novel social practices which differ from former routines, constitute solutions for social problems, and entail far reaching structural changes in society. Beside these structural effects of social innovations one has to consider the dynamic of change processes to make up criteria. An essential result of the analysis is the identification of five types of social innovations (do-it-together, strategic consumption, community based consumption, do-it-yourself, new offers for consumption), which are the basis for political intended promotion strategies and strategies for further development of the change agents.
Given that social dilemmas such as climate change, unemployment, and public health are growing globally, recognition of social drivers related to sustainable development while generating social impact is of particular interest to professionals and academics. This study aims to highlight the antecedents of sustainable social impact. Thus, we evaluate the association between entrepreneurial orientation and social impact through the mediation effects of social factors named social drivers, including service innovation, social innovation, and social value orientation. The data collection is from the service and non-service industries in Taiwan. A total of 270 samples consisting of employees, managers, SME owners, and CEOs is used. We employed structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the proposed hypotheses. Research findings indicate entrepreneurial orientation is a determining factor of sustainable innovation that not only renders entrepreneurially strategic dispositions of an organization but also significantly contributes to generating drastic social impact. In particular, entrepreneurs are found to be more proactive in solving problematic social issues through their entrepreneurial characteristics. Statistical findings support that all direct effects, besides partial and full mediation, are proved, which reveals the transformative potential of selected social drivers. Altogether, research findings provide exciting insights into entrepreneurship knowledge, innovation, and value assumptions in the social context. We further discuss theoretical and practical implications.
Transcending the conventional debate around efficiency in sustainable consumption, anti-consumption patterns leading to decreased levels of material consumption have been gaining importance. Change agents are crucial for the promotion of such patterns, so there may be lessons for governance interventions that can be learnt from the every-day experiences of those who actively implement and promote sustainability in the field of anti-consumption. Eighteen social innovation pioneers, who engage in and diffuse practices of voluntary simplicity and collaborative consumption as sustainable options of anti-consumption share their knowledge and personal insights in expert interviews for this research. Our qualitative content analysis reveals drivers, barriers, and governance strategies to strengthen anti-consumption patterns, which are negotiated between the market, the state, and civil society. Recommendations derived from the interviews concern entrepreneurship, municipal infrastructures in support of local grassroots projects, regulative policy measures, more positive communication to strengthen the visibility of initiatives and emphasize individual benefits, establishing a sense of community, anti-consumer activism, and education. We argue for complementary action between top-down strategies, bottom-up initiatives, corporate activities, and consumer behavior. The results are valuable to researchers, activists, marketers, and policymakers who seek to enhance their understanding of materially reduced consumption patterns based on the real-life experiences of active pioneers in the field.
The article considers the peculiarities of innovations in the social sphere of commercial organizations, proposes a classification of innovations in the social sphere of a commercial organization. Management, organizational, educational and economic innovation directions were identified as the main result of the empirical study. Identify the scope of innovation in the enterprise. Identify the factors that are the reasons for the need to introduce changes, in particular: increase in profits and productivity, changes in society as a whole. Analyzed the reasons that promote and hinder the effective introduction of social changes, including insufficient motivation of staff and the preparation of managers for implementing change. Relevant forms of work for the implementation of psychological support for the process of introduction of changes are found. In our opinion, in order to improve the methods of implementing social innovations in commercial organizations, a clear understanding of the place of social innovations in the system of their innovation development is necessary. Moreover, an understanding of the structural and functional division of social innovations with a view to their conscious design and implementation, which will provide innovation-led result. In order to better understand the peculiarities of introducing innovations in the social sphere of organizations, we conducted an empirical study aimed at identifying the type of innovations in the social sphere of commercial organizations that are most commonly encountered at the moment, as well as factors that determine the necessity of introducing such innovations and the factors contributing to and impede the effective implementation of social change. The main purpose of our article is to study socio-psychological conditions for the implementation of social innovations in commercial organizations .The research carried out proved the fact of existing social innovation in modern commercial organizations. In addition: 1. In modern commercial organizations, the introduction of social changes that affect various spheres of the social environment of the organization, have an uneven distribution. In particular, the most innovative changes in the managerial, organizational, educational and economic component of the social environment of the organization. 2. Among the motives for introducing changes, the motive for gaining more profit, increasing productivity and satisfaction of employees with their work are the first place. An important place among the motives is also the compliance of the needs of employees with the new needs that arise in society as a whole. The biggest obstacles are ignoring the actual needs of employees and the formality of the changes introduced. 3. The initiators of such changes are, in most cases, the management of the company, which is guided by both the needs of a purely commercial nature and the requirements of modern changes in society. 4. The readiness of the employees to participate in the innovation processes and the conditions contributing to it, namely, the motivation of the personnel and the special training of the persons responsible for these processes are revealed. 5. It has been found that appropriate forms of work on the implementation of psychological support for the process of introducing changes are socio-psychological training and counseling, both group and individual. The prospects for further research are to analyze the readiness of the leaders of organizations to implement social changes, to develop practical ways of training employees and responsible for introducing changes in the social sphere of commercial organizations.
This review of research on Social Innovation (SI) examines its place in Research and Innovation projects, especially those funded by the EU. It also reflects on the relevance of SI and SI research in collective action, policy making and socio-political transformation in Europe and the world today. In particular, it makes suggestions on how SI research can contribute to strengthening the position of the Social Sciences and Humanities in the contemporary and future European research and policy landscape. It thus seeks to explain how SI as a concept and a practice holds a great socio-political transformative potential, and warns against reducing the meaning of SI to mere social problem mending as a response to state and market insufficiencies. The included projects either have their main focus on SI, capacity building and/or networking of SI initiatives, or, alternatively, attributing a more or less important role to SI in projects with their primary focus on social policies, including youth empowerment, health, social entrepreneurship and the non-profit sector, promoting environmental sustainability, food processing and consumption, ocean development and governance, transportation, and nanotechnologies.
Die Erfahrungen der letzten Jahrzehnte haben gezeigt, dass es mit den vorrangig eingesetzten Strategien der Entwicklung nachhaltiger Produkte, effizienter Technologien sowie der Vermittlung von Wissen oder Appellen an das Umweltbewusstsein bisher nicht gelungen ist, eine umfassende Trendwende in Richtung nachhaltigerer Lebensstile einzuleiten (Jackson 2005; Bilharz 2006; Leitschuh 2013). Die Ursachen hierfür werden vor allem darin gesehen, dass konsumbezogene Entscheidungen und Handlungen Teile sozialer Praktiken sind, die in individuelle Alltagsabläufe und infrastrukturelle Rahmenbedingungen eingebettet sind und als Routinen relativ erfolgreich funktionieren und dadurch nur schwer veränderbar sind (John 2013, Jaeger-Erben 2010; Spaargaren/van Vliet 2000).
Economic globalization places increased competitive pressure on economic organizations. The latter more often respond to unpredictable socio-economic environments by change initiatives of permanent reorganization. However, permanent change can induce unintended and often detrimental effects in respect to organizational effectiveness, the quality of work and to social integration at organizational level. It is argued that the concept of organizational mindfulness – originally developed related to ‘high-reliability organizations’ – can facilitate mindful and sustainable change. In this chapter, this concept is re-conceptualized with regard to organizational change. Organizational mindfulness is viewed as an organizational capacity of action to anticipate and to constructively deal with unintended effects of permanent reorganization. Moreover, organizational mindfulness intends to uncover unnoticed innovation potentials in organizational change. Organizational mindfulness is comprised of an infrastructure of dialogue and organizational routines, and six core principles facilitating mindful change. The latter is assumed to contribute to the regeneration of economic organizations’ social-resource base, thereby promoting social sustainability at organizational level.
Mit Blick auf das Verhältnis von Innovation und Nachhaltigkeit stellen sich zwei grundlegende Fragen: erstens, inwieweit sind Innovationsprozesse steuerbar, und zweitens, kann die „Trefferquote“ von Innovationen im Sinne eines positiven Nachhaltigkeitsbeitrages im Prozess der Entstehung und Realisierung von Innovationen substanziell beeinflusst werden?
This paper introduces a Special Topic on social innovation in the governance of urban communities. It also seeks to widen the debate on the meaning of social innovation both in social science theory and as a tool for empirical research on socioeconomic development and governance at the local level. This debate is organised around ALMOLIN—i.e. alternative models for local innovation as utilised in the SINGOCOM (social innovation in governance in (local) communities) research. The first section explains the role of social innovation in neighbourhood development and how it is best addressed from theoretical, historical and experience-oriented viewpoints. The second section provides a survey of the definitions of social innovation in a variety of social science fields, while the third section mobilises various strands of literature that will be of use for the analytical refinement of ALMOLIN. Section four illustrates how ALMOLIN is used as an analytical tool for empirical research. The final section shows some avenues for future research on social innovation.
Die Einführung von Systemen zur Verbesserung der Managementqualität, verstanden als Verbesserung der Organisationsqualität,
ist eine soziale Innovation der späten achtziger Jahre des 20. Jahrhunderts, die sich durchgesetzt hat. Sie basiert auf früheren
sozialen Innovationen, darunter die der ‚wissenschaftlichen Betriebsführung‘. Sie alle sind zugleich sozialwissenschaftlich
basierte Innovationen (gewesen). Dabei verhalten sich die Verbesserung der Qualität des Managements und Qualitätsmanagement
zueinander wie die Einführung von Gruppenarbeit und die Rationalisierung nach den Taylorschen Prinzipien von Arbeitszerlegung
und Arbeitsteilung. Beide haben sehr viel miteinander zu tun, bauen u. U. gar aufeinander auf, gehören aber zwei ursprünglich
sehr unterschiedlichen Denkwelten an. Zwischen beiden liegt jeweils eine von sozialen Innovationen gespickte Entwicklung.
Und beide waren ursprünglich selbst originäre soziale Innovationen. Das ist, in wenigen Worten, die These, die hier entwickelt
werden soll. Eingebettet ist diese These in die vorgängige Erörterung des Charakters nur sozialer Innovation, will sagen,
von sozialer Innovation, die nicht an technische Innovationsprozesse gebunden ist. Das schließt nicht aus, dass sie durch
technische Innovationen erleichtert, in ihrer Ausbreitung beschleunigt oder gar modifiziert werden könnten.
Technik wird in der Gesellschaft gern als etwas Gegebenes angesehen, eine verlässliche Sache wie das Dach (tectos) über dem Kopf, eine verfügbare Ressource wie das Auto vor der Tür oder ein funktionierendes Infrastruktursystem wie das Netz
der Stromversorgung. Werkzeuge und Textilien, Maschinen und Flugverkehr werden im gegenwärtigen Alltag ebenso selbstverständlich
benutzt wie das Wasser zum Bewässern von Plantagen und Kühlen von Kraftwerken und der Boden zum Bebauen mit Straßen und Städten
und zum Ausbeuten seiner Erze und Energieträger. Die Selbstverständlichkeit, mit der die technischen Dinge und Infrastrukturen
im sozialen Handeln vorausgesetzt werden, hat häufig zu den falschen Annahmen verführt, die Technik käme nur als äußere Bedingung
der Gesellschaft oder exogener Faktor der Wirtschaft in Betracht, das Technische sei möglichst auf materielle Geräte und Maschinen
einzuschränken, und diese seien nur als wertfreie Mittel für wirtschaftliche, militärische und andere soziale Zwecke zu behandeln.
Wenn von Innovation die Rede ist, dann sind in der Regel ökonomische Innovationen gemeint. Von Schumpeter bis zu aktuellen
Definitionen geht es um die Einführung und Verbreitung von neuen und verbesserten Produkten, Prozessen, Systemen und Geräten
zur kommerziellen Nutzung in der Ökonomie (z. B. Freeman 1974: 22; OECD 1997: 133). Aber gibt es in der Gesellschaft nicht
auch viele Innovationen von nicht-ökonomischer Art, die z. B. Wissenschaft und Bildung, Politik und Alltagsleben, Kunst und
Kultur folgenreich verändern?
Over the last 30 years, and especially since the first energy crisis of the 1970s and the neoliberal réveil, regional development and urban regeneration strategies have traditionally swung between two poles. On the one hand (and predominantly) such strategies centred on the market–economic: economic strategies to make regions and cities more market-feasible and competitive; physical renewal strategies (large-scale redevelopment projects, new technological systems, flagship cultural districts) to strengthen the economic basis of territories; and institutional transformations (deregulation of markets and state practices, privatization of public domain and actions, promotion of public–private partnerships) to encourage capital investment in new fields of economic activity and across newly opened borders. But on the other hand, initiatives taken by local bottom-up movements in neighbourhoods exposed to economic restructuring dynamics have benefited from special socially oriented area-based collective action and programmes. These have been led by various types of public actors (civil society and state) and have often followed an ‘integrated’ logic of development, trying to address a diverse range of problems and needs through coordinated action. More recently, and especially under conservative governments in the United States and many European countries, neoliberal thought, discourse and practice have produced a backlash against bottom-up social development, particularly in urban neighbourhoods that have been exposed to socioeconomic restructuring. © Diana MacCallum, Frank Moulaert, Jean Hillier and Serena Vicari Haddock 2009. All rights reserved.
This article summarizes an extensive literature review addressing the question, How can we spread and sustain innovations in health service delivery and organization? It considers both content (defining and measuring the diffusion of innovation in organizations) and process (reviewing the literature in a systematic and reproducible way). This article discusses (1) a parsimonious and evidence-based model for considering the diffusion of innovations in health service organizations, (2) clear knowledge gaps where further research should be focused, and (3) a robust and transferable methodology for systematically reviewing health service policy and management. Both the model and the method should be tested more widely in a range of contexts.
Netzwerke und Kooperationsverbünde haben Konjunktur.
Worin aber besteht die Bedeutung von Verbünden im Rahmen von betrieblichen und regionalen Innovationsprozessen?
Wo sind die Grenzen ihrer Leistungsfähigkeit?
Worin liegen ihre spezifischen Erfolgsfaktoren?
Welche Verbundtypen sind in den letzten Jahren entstanden?
Für welche Ziele eignen sie sich und wie werden sie gemanagt und organisiert?
Mit diesen Fragen beschäftigen sich in 13 Beiträgen Netzwerkexperten aus Wissenschaft und Praxis. Folgende Themen werden behandelt:
- Netzwerke und regionale Innovationsprozesse
- Erfolgsfaktoren von Netzwerkarbeit
- Typen und Gegenstände der Arbeit von Kooperationsverbünden
(Qualifizierungs- und Beratungsverbünde, virtuelle Unternehmen, Branchennetzwerke)
- Netzwerkgestaltung und -management
Das Buch richtet sich an Wissenschaftler und Praktiker der Netzwerkarbeit aus Wirtschaft, Politik und Weiterbildungseinrichtungen.
Die Herausgeber beschäftigen sich in unterschiedlichen Kontexten mit der Arbeit von Netzwerken und sind selbst aktive Netzwerkmanager und -berater. Sie sind Mitbegründer des Kompetenzzentrums Netzwerkmanagement.
Dr. Jürgen Howaldt ist Diplomsozialwissenschaftler und Mitglied der Geschäftsführung des Landesinstituts Sozialforschungsstelle Dortmund.
Ralf Kopp ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Landesinstitut Sozialforschungsstelle Dortmund.
Dr. Peter Flocken ist als projektleitender Berater und Referent im RKW Nordrhein-Westfalen e.V. tätig.
Der Autor entwickelt die These, dass die zunächst befreiende und befähigende Wirkung der modernen sozialen Beschleunigung, die mit den technischen Geschwindigkeitssteigerungen des Transports, der Kommunikation oder der Produktion zusammenhängt, in der Spätmoderne in ihr Gegenteil umzuschlagen droht. Das Tempo des Lebens hat zugenommen und mit ihm Stress, Hektik und Zeitnot, so hört man allerorten klagen – obwohl wir auf nahezu allen Gebieten des sozialen Lebens mithilfe der Technik enorme Zeitgewinne durch Beschleunigung verzeichnen können. Wir haben keine Zeit, obwohl wir sie im Überfluss gewinnen. Dafür, so die leitende These der Arbeit, ist es erforderlich, die Logik der Beschleunigung zu entschlüsseln.
This article discusses the model of the diffusion of innovations and describes this model’s key variables. Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption.
In einem Discussion Paper von 200335 präsentiert Raymund Werle Stand und Perspektiven der Institutionalistischen Technikanalyse (ITA), deren Gegenstand die Genese, Entwicklung und Ausbreitung bzw. Nutzung von Technik ist, ohne dass diese notwendigerweise
als zentrales Thema in den Studien behandelt wird. Die Institutionelle Technikanalyse versteht Technik als eine maßgebliche
abhängige Größe in einem Komplex von Variablen, in dem zur Erklärung technischen Wandels unabhängige institutionelle Variablen
benutzt werden. Werle diskutiert drei institutionalistische Ansätze, die die Frage nach den Bedingungen für erfolgreiche oder
auch gescheiterte technische Innovationen zum Forschungsgegenstand haben. Innovationen werden im Sinne Joseph A. Schumpeters
(1964) als technische oder organisatorische Neuerungen, die sich am Markt durchsetzen und sich somit von Inventionen unterscheiden,
verstanden. Die Kategorisierung von Innovation ist überwiegend beschränkt auf radikal und inkrementelL Der Innovationstheoretische Institutionalismus basiert auf der Erforschung der nationalen Innovationssysteme (NIS). Der Politökonomische Institutionalismus behandelt die Spielarten des Kapitalismus. Und der Techniksoziologische Institutionalismus beschreibt eine „breitere Richtung des Institutionalismus“ (Werle 2003: 5). Werle kritisiert an allen drei Forschungsansätzen
ein Defizit an „theoretischer Konzeptualisierung von institutionellen Arrangements und deren Veränderung“ sowie den Mangel
an Untersuchungen, die „Rückwirkungen technischer Veränderungen auf Institutionen“ aufzeigen (ebd.: 2).
Innovationen pragen moderne Gesellschaften. Im Zentrum auch der rechtswissenschaftlichen Diskussion stehen meist nur technologische Innovationen. Der Beitrag legt dar, dass fur gesellschaftlichen Wandel, auch unter Nutzung technologischer Innovationen, soziale Innovationen unverzichtbar sind, etwa neue und veranderte Wege und Strategien zur Bewaltigung von Problemen, neue Organisationsformen, veranderte Einstellungen oder Lebensentwurfe. Nach einem evolutionstheoretischen Blick auf Innovationen werden Fragen aufgeworfen, die eine rechtswissenschaftliche Forschung zu sozialen Innovationen bearbeiten sollte. Anschliesend werden eine Reihe von Beispielsfeldern bezeichnet, in denen soziale Innovationen durch Recht in ihrer Entstehung und Entwicklung beeinflusst werden, so im Bereich der Arbeitswelt, des Gesundheitswesens, der Teledienstleistungen und der open source- und open content-Entwicklung im Internet.
Annotationnewline newline Annotation.newline newline Annotation
Getting an innovation adopted is difficult; a common problem is increasing the rate of its diffusion. Diffusion is the communication of an innovation through certain channels over time among members of a social system. It is a communication whose messages are concerned with new ideas; it is a process where participants create and share information to achieve a mutual understanding. Initial chapters of the book discuss the history of diffusion research, some major criticisms of diffusion research, and the meta-research procedures used in the book. This text is the third edition of this well-respected work. The first edition was published in 1962, and the fifth edition in 2003. The book's theoretical framework relies on the concepts of information and uncertainty. Uncertainty is the degree to which alternatives are perceived with respect to an event and the relative probabilities of these alternatives; uncertainty implies a lack of predictability and motivates an individual to seek information. A technological innovation embodies information, thus reducing uncertainty. Information affects uncertainty in a situation where a choice exists among alternatives; information about a technological innovation can be software information or innovation-evaluation information. An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or an other unit of adoption; innovation presents an individual or organization with a new alternative(s) or new means of solving problems. Whether new alternatives are superior is not precisely known by problem solvers. Thus people seek new information. Information about new ideas is exchanged through a process of convergence involving interpersonal networks. Thus, diffusion of innovations is a social process that communicates perceived information about a new idea; it produces an alteration in the structure and function of a social system, producing social consequences. Diffusion has four elements: (1) an innovation that is perceived as new, (2) communication channels, (3) time, and (4) a social system (members jointly solving to accomplish a common goal). Diffusion systems can be centralized or decentralized. The innovation-development process has five steps passing from recognition of a need, through R&D, commercialization, diffusions and adoption, to consequences. Time enters the diffusion process in three ways: (1) innovation-decision process, (2) innovativeness, and (3) rate of the innovation's adoption. The innovation-decision process is an information-seeking and information-processing activity that motivates an individual to reduce uncertainty about the (dis)advantages of the innovation. There are five steps in the process: (1) knowledge for an adoption/rejection/implementation decision; (2) persuasion to form an attitude, (3) decision, (4) implementation, and (5) confirmation (reinforcement or rejection). Innovations can also be re-invented (changed or modified) by the user. The innovation-decision period is the time required to pass through the innovation-decision process. Rates of adoption of an innovation depend on (and can be predicted by) how its characteristics are perceived in terms of relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability. The diffusion effect is the increasing, cumulative pressure from interpersonal networks to adopt (or reject) an innovation. Overadoption is an innovation's adoption when experts suggest its rejection. Diffusion networks convey innovation-evaluation information to decrease uncertainty about an idea's use. The heart of the diffusion process is the modeling and imitation by potential adopters of their network partners who have adopted already. Change agents influence innovation decisions in a direction deemed desirable. Opinion leadership is the degree individuals influence others' attitudes
Just as programs and organizations have too frequently been established for the presumed benefit of mankind but do not work out as expected because the social methods available are not good enough, so the author proposes that the existence of social problems in general bespeak the need for new social inventions. Social inventions provide laws, organizations, or procedures that constitute the social machinery that permit society to implement its ideals. In the first portion of this book, the theory, nature, and process of social inventions are described in relation to education, mental health, social services, and other fields. The latter section contains a list of social inventions and a brief note of the when, where, who and why for each. The list is categorized as to general, legal, welfare, educational, governmental, voluntary, and psychological social inventions. (Author/KSM)
Students of creativity have examined innovation in the arts, sciences, and engineering. Social innovation, the generation and implementation of new ideas about social relationships and social organization, has received less attention. This effort uses a case study approach, drawing from the historic record provided by Benjamin Franklin, to formulate some initial hypotheses about the strategies and tactics used to generate and implement social innovations. It was found that Franklin identified problems based on practical need, analyzed causes carefully, generated contextually appropriate low-cost implementation strategies, and built the support needed for demonstration projects. The implications of these strategies and tactics for innovation in modern organizations are discussed.
Acursory look at world affairs should convince any thinking and caring person, regardless of political ideology, that we have considerable room for improvement. Despite the tremendous strides in the quality of life that humankind has made in the past two centuries, many persistent problems remain and new ones have emerged. Rapid economic growth and various experiments with activist governments have not been sufficient to lift a huge portion of the world population out of poverty. Curable and preventable diseases still cause tremendous suffering and claim many lives, particularly among the poor. Access to education and the quality of education vary widely across the globe, even within some developed countries. Slavery and human trafficking are more serious and widespread than most of us care to admit. Violence and conflict abound on personal, tribal, national, regional, and global levels. The earth is warming, polar icecaps are melting, and biodiversity is declining at an unusually high rate, raising serious questions about the impact on future generations, regardless of the cause. The list could go on and on. We may not all agree on our visions for an ideal world, but we can generally agree that the gap between reality and our notions of the ideal is still enormous. One potentially promising strategy for improve
In May 2008, a group of management scholars and senior executives worked to define an agenda for management during the next 100 years. The so-called renegade brigade, led by Gary Hamel, included academics, such as C.K. Prahalad, Peter Senge, and Jeffrey Pfeffer; new-age thinkers, like James Surowiecki; and progressive CEOs, such as Whole Foods' John Mackey, W.L. Gore's Terri Kelly, and IDEO's Tim Brown. What drew them together was a set of shared beliefs about the importance of management and a sense of urgency about reinventing it for a new era. The group's first task was to compile a roster of challenges that would focus the energies of management innovators around the world. Accordingly, in this article, Hamel (who has set up the Management Lab, a research organization devoted to management innovation) outlines 25 "moon shots"--ambitious goals that managers should strive to achieve and in the process create Management 2.0. Topping the list is the imperative of extending management's responsibilities beyond just creating shareholder value. To do so will require both reconstructing the field's philosophical foundations so that work serves a higher purpose and fully embedding the ideas of community and citizenship into organizations. A number of challenges focus on ameliorating the toxic effects of hierarchy. Others focus on better ways to unleash creativity and capitalize on employees' passions. Still others seek to transcend the limitations of traditional patterns of management thinking. Not all the moon shots are new, but many tackle issues that are endemic in large organizations. Their purpose is to inspire new solutions to long-simmering problems by making every company as genuinely human as the people who work there.
Das neue Marktregime
- K Dörre
- B Röttger
Innovationspartnerschaften in neuen Unternehmen-Kunden-Beziehungen
- W Dunkel
- K Rieder
Internationale Innovationspartnerschaften in der IT-Branche
- A Boes
- K Trinks
Der lange Weg der sozialen Innovation - Wie Stiftungen zum sozialen Wandel im Feld der Bildungs- und Sozialpolitik beitragen können
- P Gerber
Kooperation und Innovation. Zivilgesellschaftliche und organisationstheoretische Grundlagen
- O Bluszcz
Taking Social Entrepreneurship Seriously In: Transaction Social Science and Modern Society
- Jg Dees
Nach der Krise: Zurück zur protestantischen Ethik? Sechs Anmerkungen
- R Dahrendorf
The Politics of Climate Change Konzepte sozialer Innovation. WZB paper: Querschnittsgruppe Arbeit und Ökologie
- A Giddens
Die neue Rolle der Anwender in internetbasierten Innovationsprozessen
- H Hanekop
- V Wittke
Die Hightech-Obsession blendet viel Innovationspotenzial aus
- H Hirsch-Kreinsen
work in progress) Models of Change: Einführung und Verbreitung sozialer Innovationen und gesellschaftlicher Veränderungen in transdisziplinärer Prespektive
- K Kristof
Der METALOG als Allianz für Sozial-Innovationen und Social Entrepreneurship
- F Lange
- W Stark
- K Stöckmann
- T Lemken
- M Helfert
- M Kuhndt
- F Lange
- T Merten